Ajit Vasant Kalokhe vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 1816 Bom

                                                                                  18. cri wp 1345-17.doc


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

                          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1345 OF 2017


            Ajit Vasant Kalokhe                                           .. Petitioner

                                 Versus
            The State of Maharashtra                                      .. Respondent

                                                  ...................
            Appearances
            Mr. Prosper D'Souza Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner
            Mr. H.J. Dedia      APP for the State
                                                   ...................



                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              M.S. KARNIK, JJ.

DATE : APRIL 18, 2017.

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

1. Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner preferred an application for furlough on

16.6.2016. The said application was rejected by order dated

20.9.2016. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred

an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by order dated

31.1.2017, hence, this petition.

            jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                                    1 of 2



                                                             18. cri wp 1345-17.doc

3. One of the grounds for rejecting the application of the

petitioner for furlough is that the petitioner has been

convicted for an offence under Section 376(2) of IPC. In view

of the Notification dated 1.12.2015, the prisoners who have

been convicted under Section 376 of IPC are not entitled to

be released on furlough. The petitioner is covered by this

Notification as his application for furlough is after this

Notification. In this view of the matter, we cannot find any

fault in rejecting the application of the petitioner for furlough,

hence, Rule is discharged.

[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ]                   [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]




jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                          2 of 2