Laxman Namdeo Gangurde vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 6378 Bom

                                                                                 9b. cri wp 3630-16.doc


RMA      
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION




                                                                                                
                          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3630 OF 2016




                                                                        
            Laxman Namdeo Gangurde                                       .. Petitioner

                                 Versus




                                                                       
            The State of Maharashtra                                     .. Respondent

                                                  ...................
            Appearances




                                                            
            Mr. Prosper D'Souza Advocate for the petitioner 
            Mr. Arfan Sait      APP for the State
                                              
                                     ...................
                                             
                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2016.

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

1. Heard both sides.

2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. The petitioner preferred an application for furlough on

9.3.2016. The said application came to be rejected by order

dated 20.6.2016, hence, this petition.

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2

9b. cri wp 3630-16.doc

4. Against the order of rejection of an application for

furlough, remedy of appeal to the Additional Director General

of Prisons is provided. The petitioner has not preferred an

appeal against the order of rejection. The Constitution

Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Thansingh

Nathmal & Ors. Vs Superintendent of Taxes, Dhubri 1

has observed that when an alternative remedy available, a

writ petition should not be entertained. The petitioner has

an alternate remedy available to him, hence, in our opinion,

he ought to be relegated to that remedy. In this view of the

matter, we are not inclined to interfere, hence, Rule is

discharged.

5. Office to communicate this order to the petitioner who

is in Nasik Road Central Prison.

    [ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ]           [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]




    1 AIR 1964 SC 1419

    jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                         2 of 2