Mukesh S/O Rajesh Saktel (In Jail) vs The Superintendnet Central ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 3108 Bom

                                                                              wp308.16


                                              1




                                                                                
                                                        
                                                       
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
                      Criminal Writ Petition No. 308 of 2016




                                            
     Mukesh son of Rajesh Saktel,
                             
     aged about 28 years,
     C-7800
     [Presently at Central Prison,
                            
     Nagpur].                                              .....       Petitioner.


                                            Versus
      


     1.      The Superintendent,
   



             Central Prison,
             Nagpur.

     2.      D.I. G. Prison,
             Nagpur.                                     ....      Respondents.





                                     *****
     Mr. A.S. Band, Adv., for the Petitioner.





     Mrs. Tripathy, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

                                             *****


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

                                     Date     :      22nd June, 2016





                                                                             wp308.16







                                                                              
                                                      
     ORAL JUDGMENT [Per B. R. Gavai, J.]:




                                                     

01. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned Additional

Public Prosecutor, Mrs. Tripathy, waives service on behalf of the

respondents. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties. By consent of

rival parties, this Criminal Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing and

is disposed of by this Judgment and Order.

02. The petitioner is aggrieved by rejection of his application for

grant of furlough and he is, thus, before this Court.

03. The application of the petitioner for grant of furlough is

rejected on the ground that on earlier four occasions, when the

petitioner was released on furlough and parole leaves, he was late in

returning back to jail for one reason or the other.

04. It is to be noted that, in any case, the petitioner was not

required to be arrested by police for bringing him back to the prison

when he was released on furlough and parole earlier. In that view of

the matter, we are inclined to allow the petition. Hence, the Criminal

Writ Petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be released on

wp308.16

furlough for a period of two weeks after following the due procedure.

05. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to

costs.

               Judge                                                 Judge
                              ig   -0-0-0-0-
                            
     |hedau|