Bombay High Court
Kumar Rama Gowda vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 4 December, 2014
Bench: S.S. Shinde
Cri.W.P.No.1454/2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1454 OF 2014
Kumar Rama Gowda
Age major, Occ. Prisoner,
C.No.4735, District Open Jail,
Paithan, Tq. Paithan,
District Aurangabad ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
through Secretary,
Home Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
(Copy to be served on
Public Prosecutor, High Court,
Bench at Aurangabad)
2. The Deputy Inspector General (Prison),
Central Prison, Aurangabad.
3. The Superintendent of Jail,
District Open Jail, Paithan,
District Aurangabad. ... RESPONDENTS
.....
Shri S.D. Kaldate, A.P.P. for applicant
Shri N.C. Garud, Advocate for respondents No.1, 3 and 6
.....
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND
A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.
DATED: 4th December, 2014.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.S. Shinde, J.) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard
finally, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
Cri.W.P.No.1454/2014
2. This Petition is filed for releasing the petitioner on
personal bond by relaxing the condition of furnishing surety.
3. It appears that the Petitioner is undergoing sentence
in Paithan Open Jail. The Petitioner applied for furlough leave. It
further appears from perusal of Exhibit A, Page No.7 of the
compilation of the Petition that the petitioner was directed to be
released on furlough leave on executing personal bond for
Rs.5000/- and surety from relative and second non-relative
surety for Rs.5000/- each. However, the petitioner could not
arrange for sureties.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner
invited our attention to the unreported Judgment of this Court in
the case of Dipak s/o Sudhakar Wakalekar Vs. State of
Maharashtra and others in Criminal Writ Petition No.848 of
2010 and connected Writ Petitions, dated 6th June 2011
and submitted that this Court in similar facts situation, allowed
the Petitions of the convicts and observed that the Authority
should not insist for bond being executed by the relatives of the
Petitioners and Petitioners in those Petitions, be released on
furlough/ parole on the strength of the personal bond submitted
by them as Petitioners are confined in open jail.
Cri.W.P.No.1454/2014
5. The fact that the Petitioner is lodged in Open Prison,
Paithan, is not disputed by the learned A.P.P. The Full Bench of
the Bombay High Court in the case of Dipak Sudhakar
Wakalekar vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported
in 2011 CRI. L.J. Page No.3263, in Para 23 observed as
under:
"23. In the light of the discussion made above,
we hold that as per the proviso to rule 6 of the
Rules 1959 a convict confined in open prison can
be released on furlough by the sanctioning
authority by dispensing with the requirement of
execution of bond by the relatives. We hold that
a convict confined in open prison can be
released on parole by the authorities by
dispensing with requirement of execution of
bond by the relatives."
6. The Full Bench of Gujarat High Court in the case of
Natia Jiria vs. State of Gujarat and others, reported in
1984 CRI. L.J. Page 936, has taken a view that wherein the
convict is not able to execute the surety of the relatives, in that
case the Authorities have discretion to accept personal bond
submitted by the convict and release him on furlough/parole.
7. In that view of the matter, the Authorities would
consider the prayer of the Petitioner for releasing him on furlough
in the light of observations here-in-above, without insisting for
Cri.W.P.No.1454/2014
sureties of relatives and by accepting the personal bond of the
Petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, however within two
weeks from today.
8. Rule made absolute on the terms indicated above.
The Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly.
9. Learned A.P.P. undertakes to communicate this order
to the concerned Authorities by fastest mode of service.
10. Parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order.
(A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)
fmp/cwp1454.14
