1 wp897.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.897 OF 2017
Rajesh s/o. Shriram Gawande,
Convict No.C/9050, Presently
at Central Prison, Nagpur. .......... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1)State of Maharashtra,
Through D.I.G. (Prisons),
East Division, Nagpur.
2)The Superintendent of
Central Prison,
Nagpur. .......... RESPONDENTS
____________________________________________________________
Mr.S.D.Sohoo, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs.M.H.Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the Respondents/State.
____________________________________________________________
::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/12/2017 02:14:44 :::
2 wp897.17.odt
CORAM : R.K.DESHPANDE
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATED : 18th December, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per M.G.Giratkar, J) :
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the petitioner.
2. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by respondent no.1 dt.27.7.2017. It is submitted that the petitioner applied for furlough leave. The respondent, without recording proper reason, wrongly rejected the application of petitioner on the ground that the appeal is pending and the petitioner was late to surrender in the year 2016.
3. Heard Mr.S.D.Sohoo, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mrs.M.H.Deshmukh, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents/State. Perused the impugned order. From the perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the application is rejected on the ground that ::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/12/2017 02:14:44 ::: 3 wp897.17.odt the petitioner did not surrender to the prison on the due date. Therefore, he was brought by police and crime was registered for the offence punishable under Section 224 of the Indian Penal Code against him. Another ground for rejection is that the appeal is pending against the petitioner.
4. Filing appeal against the Judgment of conviction is the right of prisoner/convict. Therefore, it cannot be said that the ground regarding pendency of appeal against the petitioner is a reasonable ground to reject application for furlough. It is mentioned in the impugned order that, in the year 2016, petitioner has not reported to jail on the due date and, therefore, he was arrested and brought to the prison. But, it is not made clear as to how many days delay was made by the petitioner in reporting to prison. Moreover, it was the first instance of the petitioner. Hence, the impugned order passed by respondent no.1 is liable to be quashed and set aside. Therefore, we pass the following order.
The petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) of the petition.
We quash and set aside the impugned order dt.27.7.2017 passed by respondent no.1. We direct the respondents ::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/12/2017 02:14:44 ::: 4 wp897.17.odt to release the petitioner on furlough leave of 21 days on such terms and conditions as they deem fit.
No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE [jaiswal] ::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/12/2017 02:14:44 ::: 5 wp897.17.odt ::: Uploaded on - 18/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/12/2017 02:14:44 :::