Devprasad @ Deva Bhujbal Devsare vs Statae Of Mah. Thr. Deputy ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 12017 Bom

Judgment

                                                                        wp395.20 4

                                           1

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

              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.395 OF 2020

Devprasad @ Deva Bhujbal Devsare,
Convict No.C/10313, Aged 33 years,
Occupation : Nil, Confined at
Central Prison, Nagpur.                               ..... Petitioner.

                                  :: V E R S U S ::

1. State of Maharashtra, through
Deputy Inspect General of
Prison, Eastern Region, Nagpur.

2. The Superintendent, Central
Prison, Nagpur.                          ..... Respondents.
===================================
Ms S.D.Wankhede, Counsel for the Petitioner.
Shri S.M.Ghodeswar, Additional Public Prosecutor for
Respondents/State.
===================================

                                CORAM      : V.M.DESHPANDE, &
                                             AMIT B.BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : AUGUST 27, 2021

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : Amit B.Borkar, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel Ms S.D.Wankhede for the

petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri

S.M.Ghodeswar for respondents/State.

2. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

.....2/-

Judgment

wp395.20 4

Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging order dated

22.5.2020, impugned in this writ petition, passed by respondent

No.1 whereby application of the petitioner for grant of furlough

leave has been rejected.

3. The petitioner is convicted for offences punishable

under Sections 302, 364(a), 201, 120-b read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code and is undergoing imprisonment for life. On

day of filing of the application for grant of furlough leave, the

petitioner had completed sentence of 3 years, 1 month, and 16

days. The petitioner, therefore, filed application for grant of

furlough leave which is rejected by order dated 22.5.2020,

impugned in this writ petition. Therefore, the present writ petition

is filed challenging the said order.

4. On 21.7.2020, this Court issued Notices to

respondents. Respondent No.2 filed its reply stating therein that

since the petitioner has been convicted for offence punishable

under Section 364(a) of the Indian Penal Code, he is not entitled

for being released on furlough leave.

.....3/-

Judgment

wp395.20 4

5. We have carefully considered the order impugned in

this writ petition and reply filed by the State authorities.

6. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner has been

convicted for offence punishable under Section 364(a) of the

Indian Penal Code. The petitioner, therefore, is not eligible for

being released on furlough leave as per Rules 4(4) and 4(6) of the

Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959. There is no

illegality while exercising powers by respondent No.1.

7. In this view of the matter, since there is no merit in

the petition, the criminal writ petition is dismissed and disposed of

accordingly.

                JUDGE                                JUDGE

!! BRW !!




                                                                        ...../-