Sanjay Mahadeo Gajbhiye vs Divisional Commissioner, ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 9912 Bom

 Judgment                                 1                                  wp385.21.odt




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


                       CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 385/2021


          Sanjay Mahadeo Gajbhiye,
          Aged about 37 years,
          R/o. Krishna Purwada Ward,
          Near Pili Building, Gondia,
          Dist. Gondia
          (C/5109, Central Prison,
          Amravati, Dist. Amravati)
                                                                    .... PETITIONER

                                    // VERSUS //

 1]       Divisional Commissioner,
          Amravati Division, Amravati

 2]       Superintendent of Jail,
          Central Prison, Amravati,
          Dist. Amravati
                                                               .... RESPONDENT(S)

  *******************************************************************
                Shri S.D. Chande, Advocate for the petitioner
              Ms. N.R. Tripathi, APP for the respondents/State
  *******************************************************************

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

JULY 28, 2021

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER:- V.M. DESHPANDE, J.)

1] RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the parties.

 ANSARI




  Judgment                                    2                                wp385.21.odt




 2]               Heard Shri S.D. Chande, learned advocate for the petitioner and

Mrs. N.R. Tripathi, learned APP for the respondents/State.

3] By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner is claiming for

following relief :-

"i) quash and set aside the impugned order dated 20.02.2021 passed by the respondent no. 1 i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati and it may be directed that the petitioner be released on parole leave for 45 days."

4] According to the petitioner, mother of the petitioner is suffering

from Asthama and Hypertension. He has produced photo copy of the medical

certificate along with his petition at Annexure 'B' which is given by Mirawant

Critical Care Hospital under the signature of Dr. Rajendra Vaidya. Perusal of

the said certificate does not show any serious condition of the mother of the

petitioner. This certificate is dated 05/01/2021. Further in the reply filed on

behalf of the State Authority, it is specifically stated that the petitioner did

not produce the medical certificate regarding the illness of his mother before

the Authority. Though learned advocate for the petitioner submits that there

is a circular issued by the Department that there should not be insistence of

the certificate, however, he admitted that in large number of decisions, this

Court has ruled that unless and until the certificate is produced before the

ANSARI

Judgment 3 wp385.21.odt

Authority, the claim of the prisoner cannot be considered on the ground of

illness.

5] Further the reply shows that in 2014 when the petitioner was

released on furlough, during his furlough leave, he committed an offence on

27/12/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 149, 427, 452

504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and the crime was registered vide

Crime No. 227/2014. It is the submission of the learned advocate for the

petitioner that from the said offence, the petitioner is already acquitted.

Question is not of conviction or acquittal. The point is when the petitioner is

released on furlough, he has a tendency to commit the offence. That surely in

our view, debar the petitioner to claim parole or furlough.

6] In that view of the matter, the writ petition is devoid of any

substance and the same is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Pending

application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

                  (JUDGE)                                  (JUDGE)




 ANSARI