Shri. Virendra Shivpujan Shukla ... vs Dy. Inspector General Of Prisons ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 4960 Bom

                                              1                                                              criwp209.17


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

                       CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 209 OF 2017

Shri Virendra Shivpujan Shukla,
aged about 41 years, Convicted 
Prisoner bearing Prisoner No.
C/8939, Nagpur Central Jail, Nagpur,
R/o Adarsh Colony, Nagpur, within
the limits of Police Station, Gitti-
khadan City, Nagpur.                                                   ... PETITIONER

                                                  VERSUS

1. Dy. Inspector General of Prisons,
     East Division, Nagpur.

2. Addl. Suptd. of  Police (Crime),
     Nagpur City, Nagpur.

3. Suptd. Central Prison, Nagpur,
     Wardha Road, Nagpur.                                              ... RESPONDENTS

                                      ....
Shri S.M. Agrawal, Advocate holding for Rohan Chhabra, Advocate for the 
petitioner.
Shri A.M. Joshi, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
                                      ....

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

DATED : 24TH 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 challenges the order

dated 16.02.2017 passed by respondent No.1 thereby rejecting the

2 criwp209.17

application for grant of furlough leave made by the petitioner.

3. It is submitted that the application for grant of furlough leave

came to be rejected on the ground that on last occasion, the petitioner

reported late. It is further submitted that the petitioner is serving jail

sentence of seven years for the offence punishable under Sections 304 and

498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has applied for furlough

leave. His application is wrongly rejected on the ground that he reported the

jail authority late by 26 days. Therefore, prayed to quash and set aside the

impugned order.

4. The petition is strongly opposed by the respondents and

submitted that the petitioner is overstayed for 23 days on earlier occasion.

Therefore, as per Rule 4(4) and Rule 6 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and

Leave) Rules, 1959, his application is rightly rejected.

5. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP

appearing on behalf of the respondents.

6. Shri Agrawal, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has pointed

out the documents and submitted that he was directed to attend the police

station as per the directions given by this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.

74 of 2016 and, therefore, he could not surrender on due date. The reply

itself does not show that he was habitual in surrendering late. For the first

time he was late by 26 days and it is explained by the petitioner. Hence, the

3 criwp209.17

impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside.

7. For the aforesaid reasons, we allow the petition in terms of prayer

clause (2) and (3). The impugned order dated 16.02.2017 is quashed and set

aside. The respondents are directed to release the petitioner on furlough on

usual conditions. Rule is accordingly made absolute with no order as to

costs.

                JUDGE                                                               JUDGE 
      
*rrg.