Manmitsingh Surendrasingh Digwa ... vs Deputy Inspector General Of ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 4589 Bom

                                                  1                                                              wp276.17


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                          NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                       CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 276 OF 2017

Manmitsingh Surendrasingh Digwa,
aged 28 years, R/o Qtr No.128, Behind
Petrol Pump, Vaishali Nagar, Nagpur.
(C/9433 Central Prison, Nagpur.)                                        ... PETITIONER

                                                   VERSUS

1. Deputy Inspector General of Prison,
     Central Prison, Nagpur.

2. Superintendent of Jail, Central
     Prison, Nagpur.                                                    ... RESPONDENTS

                                      ....
Ms. S.B. Khobragade, Advocate (appointed) for the petitioner.
Shri A.M. Joshi, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
                                      ....

                                                                     CORAM :  PRASANNA B. VARALE AND
                                                                                          M.G. GIRATKAR, JJ.

DATED : 17TH JULY, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per M.G. Giratkar, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the

consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

2. By way of present petition, the petitioner has challenged the

order dated 14.03.2017 passed by the respondent No.1 thereby rejecting the

application for grant of furlough leave of the petitioner.

3. It is submitted that on 27.12.2016, the petitioner applied to

release him on furlough leave for 21 days on the ground that he wanted to

2 wp276.17

see his family members. The sanctioning authority i.e. respondent No.1

obtained the report from the Commissioner of Police, Nagpur. Due to

adverse report of the Commissioner of Police, the respondent No.1 wrongly

rejected the application for furlough. The respondents have supported thee

impugned order by filing reply.

4. Heard the learned Counsel and the learned APP appearing on

behalf of the respective parties. Perused the application for furlough leave of

the petitioner dated 27.12.2016 which came to be rejected on the ground that

there was election of the Municipal Corporation of Nagpur City. Now the

election is over. Therefore, thee petitioner is liable to be released on

furlough.

5. In the result, the petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (i)

with a direction to the respondents to release the petitioner on furlough

leave on usual conditions.

Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as to

costs.

Fees to be paid to the learned Counsel appointed for the

petitioner are quantified at Rs.1,500/- (rupees one thousand five hundred

only).

                JUDGE                                                                  JUDGE 
      
*rrg.