Bhaskar Nanaji Karmenge (In Jail) vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Deputy ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 4333 Bom

        cwp380.16                              1




                                                                                
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                        
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR


                     CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.380 OF 2016.




                                                       
       PETITIONER:             Bhaskar Nanaji Karmenge,
                                  aged about 38 years, Convict No.




                                           
                                  C-9000, presently in Central Prison,
                                  Nagpur.
                             
         
                                         : VERSUS :
                            
       RESPONDENTS: 1.    State of Maharashtra through Deputy
                          Inspector General Prisons (Eastern Region),
                          Nagpur.
      


                                  2.  The Superintendent of Jail, 
                                      Central Prison, Nagpur.
   



       -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
       Ms.S.H.Bhatia, Advocate (appointed) for the petitioner.





       Mrs.N.R.Tripati, Addl.Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
       =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

                                      CORAM:      B.R.GAVAI AND 
                                                             V.M.DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED: 1st AUGUST, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R.Gavai, J.)

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by

consent of learned counsel for both the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court being

aggrieved by the rejection of his application for grant of furlough

leave.

3.

The application is rejected on following two grounds:-

(i) If the petitioner is released on furlough, he will indulge into the criminal activities and as such there is possibility of disturbing the law

and order.

(ii) The surety provided by the petitioner is old-

aged mother and therefore, she will not be able to keep control over the petitioner.

4. Insofar as the first ground is concerned, the petitioner

has not been released on furlough leave on any earlier point of

time and therefore, such a apprehension is misconceived.

5. Insofar as second ground is concerned, merely because

the surety is old-aged, it cannot be said that she will not be able to

keep control over the petitioner. It is to be noted that surety

provided by the petitioner is his own mother.

6. In that view of the matter, impugned order is quashed

and set aside. The application is allowed. The petitioner is

directed to be released on furlough leave, in accordance with law,

after following the due procedure.

Fees to be paid to the learned counsel appointed by the

Legal Aid Committee to represent the petitioner is quantified at

Rs.1500/-.

                      JUDGE                                               JUDGE



       chute










                                                                            
                                                    
                                                   
                      -CERTIFICATE- 

I certify that this Order uploaded is a true and

correct copy of original signed order.

Uploaded by : P.Z.Chute,

Pvt.Secretary.

Uploaded on: 02/08/2016.