Gajanan Hari Gudekar vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 8916 Bom

 jdk                                                1                                              16.crwp.4234.17.j.doc


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                     CRIMINAL W.P.NO. 4234 OF 2017


Gajanan Hari Gudekar                                                             ]
C/10523, Presently in Nasik Road                                                 ]
Central Prison, Nasik                                                            ].. Petitioner

                    Vs.

The State of Maharashtra                                                         ].. Respondent


                             ....
Mr Prosper D'Souza Advocate appointed for the Petitioner
Mrs. G.P.Mulekar A.P.P. for the State
                             ....


                                        CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
                                                M.S.KARNIK, JJ.

DATED : NOVEMBER 21, 2017

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

1                   Heard both sides.



2                   The petitioner preferred an application for furlough on

13.12.2016. The said application was rejected by order dated

3.4.2017. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an

appeal. The appeal was dismissed by order dated 11.8.2017,

hence, this petition.

                                                                                                    1   of  2





              jdk                                                2                                              16.crwp.4234.17.j.doc

            3                   The application of the petitioner for furlough came to

be rejected on the ground that the appeal preferred by him

against his conviction and sentence is pending before the

Supreme Court. In Notification dated 26.8.2016 it is provided

that if the appeal of the prisoner is pending before a higher

Court and he has not been granted bail by the said Court, in

such case, furlough cannot be granted to such prisoner.

Looking to these facts, we are not inclined to interfere, hence,

Rule is discharged. Petition is dismissed.

[ M.S.KARNIK, J.] [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]

kandarkar

2 of 2