Prashant S/O. Bhanudas Patil (In ... vs Deputy Inspector General Of ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 954 Bom

                                 1                             wp44.17.odt




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR



                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.44 OF 2017



  Prashant s/o. Bhanudas Patil,
  Aged 55 years, r/o. Tulzapur,
  Post Dahegaon (Gosavi), Tah.
  Seloo, District Wardha.
  (C/9083, Central Prison,
  Nagpur).                                  ..........      PETITIONER



          // VERSUS //



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

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




::: Uploaded on - 24/03/2017                      ::: Downloaded on - 25/03/2017 00:57:33 :::
                                         2                               wp44.17.odt

  ____________________________________________________________  
               Ms S.B.Khobragade, Advocate for the Petitioner.
            Mrs.N.R.Tripathi, A.P.P. for the Respondents/State.
  ____________________________________________________________



                                         CORAM     :  B.R. GAVAI 
                                                      AND
                                                      KUM.INDIRA JAIN, JJ.

DATE : 22.3.2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. GAVAI, J) :

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by

consent.

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

this Court being aggrieved by rejection his application for grant of

furlough leave.

3. The application is opposed vehemently by the learned

A.P.P. for the respondents. The learned A.P.P. submits that since the

police report was adverse, the application has been rightly rejected.

He further submits that the applicant has surrendered belatedly on

3 wp44.17.odt

earlier occasions and as such, he is not entitled to be released on

furlough.

4. A perusal of the record would reveal that though the

petitioner has surrendered belatedly on earlier occasions, on all the

occasions he has surrendered himself. So far as surrendering late is

concerned, the authorities are always entitled to take such action as

is permissible in law.

6. In that view of the matter, we find that the petition

deserves to be allowed. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in the

terms of prayer clause (i) of the Criminal Writ Petition.

No order as to costs.

                             JUDGE                               JUDGE
   



  [jaiswal]





                                4                wp44.17.odt