Amarsingh S/O. Narendrasingh ... vs The Divisional Commissioner ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7428 Bom

                                      1                                      jg.cri.wp 840.17.odt

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

                    Criminal Writ Petition No. 840 of 2017

Amarsingh S/o Narendrasingh Bais 
Aged about Adult, Occ : Nil, 
R/o Presently detained in District 
Open Prison, Gadchiroli 
(Convict No. C/27)                                                          .... Petitioner

      //  Versus //

(1) The Divisional Commissioner,
      Nagpur Division, Nagpur. 

(2) The Superintendent, District 
      Open Prison, Gadchiroli                                           .... Respondents

Ms. P. P. Chobe, Advocate for the petitioner (appointed)
Shri K. R. Lule, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents             
                                                      
                                    CORAM      : SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK AND
                                                  M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.

DATE : 21-9-2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The criminal writ

petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the

learned counsel for the parties.

By this criminal writ petition, the petitioner challenges the

order of the Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur dated 9-6-2017 rejecting

the application of the petitioner for grant of parole leave.

.....2/-

2 jg.cri.wp 840.17.odt

The parole leave application of the petitioner is rejected only

because the petitioner had surrendered 23 days after the due date when

he released on parole on the earlier occasion.

It appears that the petitioner was released on parole and

furlough on a number of occasions but only on one occasion, the

petitioner had surrendered belatedly. Hence, an opportunity needs to be

granted to the petitioner to mend his ways. The application made by the

petitioner could not have been rejected only because the petitioner had

surrendered belatedly on one occasion.

Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the criminal writ petition is

allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondents

are directed to release the petitioner on parole leave within 7 days from

the date on which the relative of the petitioner furnishes the surety, as is

required by Rule 6 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules,

1959.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as

to costs.

.....3/-

3 jg.cri.wp 840.17.odt

The professional fees of the learned counsel for the petitioner

are quantified at Rs. 1500/-.

                  JUDGE                                          JUDGE



wasnik




                                                                                       ...../-