Kamlakar Devidas Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 5070 Bom

 jdk                                                     1                                              30.crwp.2526.17.j.doc


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2526 OF 2017

Kamlakar Devidas Patil                                                          ]
R/o Kambala, Post. Dabhad,                                                      ]
Taluka Bhivandi, Dist. Thane                                                    ]
At present Kalamba Central Prison,                                              ]
Kolhapur as Convict No.3423                                                     ].. Petitioner

                    Vs.

The State of Maharashtra                                                        ]
through its Subsidiary like                                                     ]
Deputy Inspector of Prison,                                                     ]
Western Region, Pune-6                                                          ].. Respondent


                              ....
Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate appointed for Petitioner
Mrs. G.P.Mulekar A.P.P. for the State
                              ....


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

DATED : JULY 26, 2017

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

1                   Heard both sides.



2                   The petitioner preferred an application for furlough on

31.5.2016. The said application was rejected by order dated

2.12.2016. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred

an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by order dated 6.3.2017,

1 of 2

jdk 2 30.crwp.2526.17.j.doc

hence, this petition.

3 The application of the petitioner came to be rejected

in view of Rule 4(10) of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and

Parole) Rules, 1959. Rule 4(10) states that Prisoners who at

any time defaulted any way in surrendering themselves on the

appropriate time after release on parole or furlough, they shall

not be granted furlough. It is a matter of record that on

15.6.2009 when the petitioner was released on parole for a

period of 30 days, he did not report back to the prison in time

and he absconded. Ultimately, he was traced and arrested by

the police and brought back to the prison and there was

overstay of 228 days on the part of the petitioner. Looking to

this fact we cannot find any error in the orders of the authorities

rejecting the application of the petitioner for furlough, hence,

we are not inclined to interfere. Rule is discharged. Petition is

dismissed.

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

kandarkar

2 of 2