Bandu S/O Kashinath Dhanorkar (In ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. D.I.G. ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 6428 Bom

                                                                                                                      27.10.wp.687.16
                                                                          1




                                                                                                                                   
                              THE  COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR




                                                                                                 
                               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.  687/2016
        (Bandu  s/o Kashinath Dhanorkar  (in Jail)   vs.   The State of Maharashtra and  another )
    ..............................................................................................................................................
    Office Notes, Office Memoranda of




                                                                                                
    Coram, appearances, Court's orders                                                  Court's or Judge's order 
    of directions and Registrar's orders
    ..............................................................................................................................................
                Mr.A.Y. Sharma,   Advocate for the applicant 
                Ms.Tripathi, Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondents




                                                                             
                                                                 CORAM :   B.P. DHARMADHIKARI 
                                                ig                           & A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

DATED : 27th October, 2016.

By order dated 11.4.2016 furlough leave has been declined to the petitioner on the ground that when he was released earlier, he has reported late.

We have heard Advocate Sharma for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2, and perused the

reply.

In 2014 when the petitioner was released on furlough leave, he had reported back late, by 20 days.

Before that, in 2011, he had reported back late, by 93 days. However the fact remains that he was not required to be arrested. Furlough leave has been rejected on the ground

of this late reporting.

In this situation, after obtaining appropriate bonds/ undertaking from the petitioner as also his surety and directing him to report at local Police Station once in every three days during furlough leave, the respondents shall release him within four weeks from today .

27.10.wp.687.16

The Writ Petition is, thus, partly allowed and disposed of. No costs.

                                               JUDGE                             JUDGE
    sahare