Imran Maula Kalawant vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 9592 Bom

                                                                                   1. cri wp 4423-17.doc


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

                          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4423 OF 2017

            Imran Maula Kalawant                                          .. Petitioner
                                 Versus
            The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                .. Respondents
                                      ...................
            Appearances
            Mrs. Nasreen S.K. Ayubi Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner
            Mrs. G.P. Mulekar       APP for the State
                                                   ...................

                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, Acting C.J. &
                                              M.S. KARNIK, J.

DATE : DECEMBER 13, 2017.

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

1. Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner preferred an application for furlough on

19.10.2016. The said application was rejected by order

dated 7.2.2017. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner

preferred an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by order

dated 28.6.2017, hence, this petition.

3. The application of the petitioner for furlough came to

be rejected on the ground that the petitioner has been

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2

1. cri wp 4423-17.doc

convicted in a case of rape. Notification dated 1.12.2015

states that if a person has been convicted for the offence of

rape, he shall not be granted furlough.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that

even if the petitioner is convicted under Section 376 of IPC,

he can be granted furlough. To support this contention,

reliance was placed on three Writ Petitions which have been

decided by this Court i.e Cri. Writ Petition No. 432 of 2013

( Balu s/o Savleram Ubale Vs. The State of Maharashtra &

Ors. ), Cri. Writ Petition No. 3325 of 2014 (Santosh Namdeo

Bhukan Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Cri. Writ Petition

No. 4017 of 2016 (Rubina Suleman Memon Vs. The State of

Maharashtra & Ors. ). We have perused the said decisions,

however, they would not help the petitioner in any manner.

In view of the notification dated 1.12.2015, we are not

inclined to interfere, hence, Rule is discharged.

[ M.S. KARNIK, J ]                    [ ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ]



jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                         2 of 2