jdk 1 7.crwp.2119.17.j.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2119 OF 2017
Javed Noor Hasan Khan ]
C/10439, Circle No. 1 /4 ]
Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik. ].. Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ].. Respondent
....
Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate appointed for Petitioner
Ms. M.H.Mhatre A.P.P. for the State
....
CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
SANDEEP K.SHINDE, JJ.
DATED : JULY 14, 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. ]:
1 Heard both sides. 2 The petitioner preferred an application on 7.3.2016 for furlough. The application was rejected by order dated
7.10.2016. Being aggrieved thereby the petitioner preferred an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by order dated 31.1.2017. Being aggrieved by both these orders, the present petition has 1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 19/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2017 23:52:57 ::: jdk 2 7.crwp.2119.17.j.doc been preferred by the petitioner.
3 A perusal of the order of rejection shows that the main reason for rejecting the application for furlough was that the petitioner is involved in six separate cases. Ms. Dandekar, the learned advocate for the petitioner, pointed out that the petitioner is not involved in six different cases but he is convicted in one case under six different charges. In view of the statement made by Ms. Dandekar, we went through the jail record of the petitioner. The said jail record shows that the petitioner is involved in CR No. 8 of 2013 by ATS Kala Chowky in which he has been convicted under Sections 216, 419 r.w. 34, 420 r.w. 34, 463 r.w. 34, 468 r.w. 34 and 471 r.w. 34 of IPC, hence, it cannot be said that the petitioner is undergoing sentence in six different cases, hence, it is on this ground alone, the orders dated 7.10.2016 and 31.1.2017 deserve to be set aside. However, it is noticed that in addition, it is stated that the surety proposed by the petitioner is not found competent and suitable. No reason has been set out as to how the surety is not found competent or suitable. Another reason for rejecting the application of the petitioner for furlough was that if he is 2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 19/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2017 23:52:57 ::: jdk 3 7.crwp.2119.17.j.doc released on furlough, he may abscond. No material has been pointed out to us for the respondents to reach such a conclusion.
4 In view of the above facts, the orders dated 7.10.2016 and 31.1.2017 are set aside. The petitioner to be released on furlough on usual terms and conditions as set out by the competent authorities. Rule is made absolute in above terms. Petition is disposed of.
[ SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. ] [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] kandarkar 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 19/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2017 23:52:57 :::