Sachin Chandrakant Dangat vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 5535 Bom

                                                                                   22. cri wp 2610-17.doc


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

                          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2610 OF 2017


            Sachin Chandrakant Dangar                                      .. Petitioner

                                 Versus
            State of Maharashtra & Ors.                                    .. Respondents

                                                  ...................
            Appearances
            Mr. Priyal G. Sarda Advocate for the Petitioner
            Mr. H.J. Dedhia     APP for the State
                                                   ...................



                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE : AUGUST 3, 2017.

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

1. Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner preferred an application for furlough on

23.6.2016. The said application was rejected by order dated

28.10.2016. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner

preferred an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by order

dated 16.1.2017, hence, this petition.

            jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                                     1 of 2





                                                          22. cri wp 2610-17.doc

3. The application of the petitioner for furlough came to

be rejected mainly on the ground that the petitioner is

involved in another case under Section 302 of IPC besides

the present case in which the petitioner has been convicted

under Section 302 of IPC. The said case is C.R. No. 301/08 of

Dehu Road Police Station, Pune. Further the application of

the petitioner came to be rejected on the ground that in the

case in which he was convicted i.e C.R. No. 87/2010 which is

mainly under Section 302 of IPC, the murder was committed

by the petitioner and his associates within the premises of

the Sessions Court, Pune. Looking to the brazen act of the

petitioner of committing the murder in the premises of the

Sessions Court, Pune, it is apprehended that the petitioner

will abuse the liberty granted to him if he is released on

furlough.

4. Looking to the above facts, we are not inclined to

interfere, hence, Rule is discharged.

[ SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. ]             [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]



jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                       2 of 2