Moh. Parvez Zulifikar Qureshi vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 6958 Bom

     jdk                                                   1                                              2.crwp.3876.16.j.doc




                                                                                                                       
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3876 OF 2016




                                                                                              
    Mohd. Parvez Zulfikar Qureshi                                                   ]
    C-9031, Nasik Road Central Prison.                                              ].. Petitioner




                                                                                             
                        Vs.

    The State of Maharashtra                                                        ]..Respondent




                                                                         
                                  ....
    Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate appointed for Petitioner
                                              
    Mr. Arfan Sait A.P.P. for the State
                                  ....
                                             
                                            CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
                                                    A.M.BADAR, JJ.

DATED : DECEMBER 06, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT : [PER SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. ]:

    1                   Heard both sides.





    2                   The petitioner preferred an application for furlough.

The said application was granted by order dated 21.5.2015.

Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was released on

furlough on 22.7.2015. The petitioner had to surrender on

6.8.2015, however, in the meantime, on 27.7.2015, the

petitioner preferred an application for extension of furlough.

                                                                                                        1   of  4





      jdk                                                   2                                              2.crwp.3876.16.j.doc

The said application was rejected on 3.8.2015. As stated

earlier, the petitioner had to surrender on 6.8.2015, however,

the petitioner surrendered on 9.8.2015. Thus, there was

overstay of three days on the part of the petitioner. On

account of this overstay, his remission was cut in the ratio of 5

days for each day of overstay i.e. 15 days of remission was cut.

Being aggrieved by the prison punishment imposed on him, the

petitioner has preferred this petition.

3 The petitioner has annexed the medical certificate of

his younger sister Shaheen which shows that she had severe

lumbar spondylosis and she was having severe neck pain and

vertigo and she was advised MRI of cervical spine. The said

certificate is dated 25.7.2015. The genuineness of this

certificate is not doubted by the prosecution. Moreover, the jail

record of the petitioner shows that on six occasions, he was

released on furlough and on one occasion he was released on

parole and on all these occasions, he reported back in time.

He was released on furlough on 28.2.2009, 18.9.2009,

5.11.2010, 29.8.2011, 14.8.2012 and 28.7.2014. On these

occasions, he reported back in time. The petitioner was

2 of 4

jdk 3 2.crwp.3876.16.j.doc

released on furlough on 13.12.2014, however, he was one day

late in reporting back to the prison, but it is noticed that he

reported back to the prison on his own and it is not the case of

the police arresting him and bringing him back to the prison.

On 19.2.2010 the petitioner was released on parole and he

reported back in time.

4 The learned A.P.P. submitted that on 13.12.2014 the

petitioner was released on furlough. He had to report back on

27.12.2014, however, the petitioner preferred an application

for extension of furlough. The said extension was granted and

the petitioner had to surrender on 11.1.2015. The learned

A.P.P. submitted that Notification dated 2.12.2003 states that

extension for furlough leave can only be granted once in a

calender year. Thus, the learned A.P.P. submitted that as in

January 2015, extension of furlough was already granted to the

petitioner, again in the same calender year, he cannot be

granted extension of furlough. In this view of the matter, we

cannot find fault with the authorities rejecting the application

dated 27.7.2015 for extension of furlough. However, looking to

the fact that genuineness of the medical certificate relied by

3 of 4

jdk 4 2.crwp.3876.16.j.doc

the petitioner for seeking furlough, is not doubted and the

earlier record of the petitioner shows that he has reported back

to the prison in time, we are of the opinion that the punishment

of cutting of remission of five days for each day of overstay

should be reduced. Hence, we reduce the said punishment and

we impose punishment of cutting of remission of one day for

each day of overstay. If the surety amount has been forfeited,

same be returned back to the petitioner. Petition is partly

allowed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

5 Office to communicate this order to the petitioner

who is in Nasik Road Central Prison, Nasik.

[ A.M.BADAR, J.] [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. ]

kandarkar

4 of 4