Bombay High Court
Chandu Bapuji Medappalliwar (In ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Deputy ... on 22 November, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 wp938.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.938 OF 2017
Chandu Bapuji Medappalliwar,
Convict No.C/8813, Aged 50
years, Occ. Nil, Confined at
Central Prison, Nagpur. .......... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Deputy Inspector
General, Central Prison,
Eastern Region, Nagpur.
2. The Superintendent,
Central Prison,
Nagpur. .......... RESPONDENTS
____________________________________________________________
Ms S.D.Wankhede, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs.N.R.Tripathi, A.P.P. for the Respondents/State.
____________________________________________________________
::: Uploaded on - 27/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/11/2017 01:05:53 :::
2 wp938.17.odt
CORAM : R.K.DESHPANDE
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATED : 22nd November, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per M.G.Giratkar, J) :
1. The Criminal Appeal is admitted and heard finally with
the consent of the learned Counsel for the respective parties.
2. By the present petition, the petitioner has prayed to
quash and set aside the impugned order passed by respondent no.1
and has also prayed to direct the respondent no.1 to release him on
furlough for 28 days.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner applied for furlough
leave on 13.7.2017. His application came to be rejected on
23.8.2017 on the ground that appeal is pending against his
conviction. Report of concerned Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Gadchiroli is against the petitioner. He was in a habit of surrendering
late.
3 wp938.17.odt
4. Heard Ms S.D.Wankhede, learned Counsel for the
petitioner and Mrs.N.R.Tripathi, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.
1 and 2. Perused the impugned order. The impugned order shows
that the application for furlough of the petitioner came to be rejected
only on the ground that he did not surrender on the due dates when
he was released on 23.12.2014, 30.9.2010, 13.6.2016, 4.5.2017 as
per the chart given below :
Sr. Particulars Date of Release Due for surrender Remarks
No.
1 Furlough 23.12.2014 Not surrendered on Arrested by the police
leave due date authority and brought back
to the prison after period of
18 days i.e. on 25.01.2015
and offence u/s.224 of IPC
was registered but bail is
granted.
2 Parole Leave 30.09.2010 Not surrendered on Surrendered himself but
due date late by 55 days i.e. on
08.02.2011.
3 Parole Leave 13.06.2016 Not surrendered on Surrendered himself but
due date late by 01 days i.e. on
13.09.2016.
4 Parole Leave 04.05.2017 Surrendered on due Surrendered himself on
date due date i.e. on 04.06.2017
4 wp938.17.odt
5. On the last occasion i.e. on 4.5.2017, the petitioner
surrendered on the due date. Therefore, this cannot be a ground to
reject his application. From the perusal of Police report, it could be
seen that it is favourable to the petitioner. The report of Dy.S.P.,
Gadchiroli shows that the surety is ready to take surety of the
petitioner and there is no objection to release the petitioner on
furlough. It appears that the report of Dy.S.P., Gadchiroli is not taken
into consideration by respondent no.1.
6. The petitioner has challenged his conviction and that
cannot be a ground to reject the application for furlough. Filing of
appeal against the conviction is statutory right of a convict and on
that ground, he cannot be denied furlough leave. Hence, the
impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside. Hence, we pass
the following order.
// ORDER //
The petition is allowed.
5 wp938.17.odt
The impugned order dt.23.8.2017 passed by
respondent no.1 is hereby quashed and set aside.
Respondent No.1 is directed to release the
petitioner on furlough leave of 28 days after his furnishing
surety of nearest relatives.
Petitioner is directed to report twice in a week
i.e. on Wednesday and Saturday to Police Station,
Chamorshi.
He shall surrender on the due date to the
prison.
JUDGE JUDGE
[jaiswal]
6 wp938.17.odt
