Kashiram @ Pintaya Rama Salunkhe vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 1600 Bom

                                                                               Cr.WP 332/16   
      
                                                   -  1 -

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                    
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD               
                                          




                                                        
                                        CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.332/2016

                      Kashiram @ Pintyya Rama Salunke,
                      Convict No.C-130, age major,




                                                       
                      occu.nil, presently in jail Visapur,
                      Open District Prison, Visapur.
                      Dist.Ahmednagar. 
                                        ...Petitioner..
                             Versus




                                               
                              1]    ig  The State of Maharashtra,
                                        through Superintendent of District
                                        Open Prison, Visapur.
                                        Dist.Ahmednagar.
                                  
                              2]
                      Inspector General of Prisons,
                      Western Division, Pune. 
                                          ...Respondents... 
                                                           
      


                              .....
    Shri Swapnil B. Joshi, Advocate appointed for petitioner.
   



    Shri K.S. Patil, APP for respondent nos.1 & 2. 
                              .....
      
                                CORAM: R.M. BORDE &





                                        K.L. WADANE, JJ. 

DATE: 18.04.2016

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Borde, J.)

1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the

petition is taken for final disposal at the admission

stage.

Cr.WP 332/16

- 2 -

2] The petitioner is praying for issuance of a writ

directing the respondents to release him on furlough by

executing P.R. Bond and on cash security. The petitioner

tendered an application for release on furlough, which

was not considered earlier. As such, he approached this

Court by way of presenting Criminal Writ Petition

No.291/2015. A direction was issued by this Court while

disposing of said petition to take decision on the

application tendered by the petitioner for his release on

furlough expeditiously. The petitioner was directed to

submit surety of his near relation to ensure his return

back to the prison. Since the petitioner was not in a

position to furnish surety, his application has not been

considered favourably.

3] Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

informs that the petitioner has actually undergone

imprisonment for a period of more than 10 years, whereas

he has earned remission for 4 years 1 month and 5 days.

The total period of imprisonment as such until April,

2016, is 14 years 8 months and 4 days. The petitioner

was never released on furlough any time prior to

presentation of the instant petition. It is the

Cr.WP 332/16

- 3 -

petitioner that merely because he is not in a position to

furnish surety of his near relation, his application

cannot be turned down.

4] Reliance is placed on the Full Bench judgment of

this Court dated 4.5.2011 in the matter of Dipak

Sudhakar Wakalekar v. State of Maharashtra & others

reported at 2011 CRI.L.J. 3263. The issue referred for

consideration to the Full Bench was as to whether as per

proviso to Rule 6 of The Prison (Bombay Furlough and

Parole) Rules, 1959, a convict confined in open prison,

can be released on parole / furlough by the authorities

by dispensing with the requirement of execution of bond

by the relatives. The Full Bench has opined that in

view of 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.

5] In view of the decision of the Full Bench

referred to above, there shall be no impediment for

consideration of the application tendered by the

petitioner favourably for his release on furlough without

insisting for execution of surety bond by his relatives.

Cr.WP 332/16

- 4 -

Since the petitioner is already in jail for more than 10

years, it shall be presumed that he must have earned some

amount, which must have been deposited in his account.

The petitioner in these circumstances can be directed to

execute a P.R. bond and also furnish cash security, since

the amount to which the petitioner is entitled to, is

lying with the jail authorities.

6] In view of above, we direct the respondents to

release the petitioner on furlough on execution of the

P.R. Bond as well as on condition of furnishing cash

security (in the sum of the amount, which is already

lying with the jail authorities) as expeditiously as

possible and preferably within a period of four weeks

from today. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

7] Shri Swapnil Joshi, learned counsel appointed as

amicus curiae in the matter shall be paid legal

remuneration of Rs.5,000/-.

               (K.L. WADANE, J.)                          (R.M. BORDE, J.) 
                             
                

    ndk/cr1841620.doc