Bombay High Court
Jeevan S/O Deepak Waghmare vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 3 September, 2021
Bench: S.S. Shinde, N. J. Jamadar
Digitally signed by
LAXMIKANT LAXMIKANT
GOPAL GOPAL CHANDAN
Date: 2021.09.09
CHANDAN 10:06:53 +0530 (4) judgment cri.wp-2399.19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2399 OF 2019
Jeevan s/o Deepak Waghmare (C-6788) ]
Age Major, Occ : Convict, ]
R/o. C/o Sagar Vansant Jamdhade ]
Khot Nagar, Malgaon Road, Miraj ]
Tal. Miraj, Dist. Sangli ]
At present Central Jail Kalamba ]
Kolhapur ]..... Petitioner
versus
1] State of Maharashtra, ]
Through Inspector General of Prison ]
Pune ]
]
2] State of Maharashtra ]
Through D.I.G. Prisons Pune ]
]
3] State of Maharashtra, ]
Through Superintendent ]
Open Prison, Visapur, ]
Tal. Shrigondha, Dist. Ahmednagar, ]
]
4] State of Maharashtra, ]
Through Superintendent ]
Central Prison, Kalamba, Kolhapur ]..... Repondents.
Mr. Rupesh Jaiswal for the Petitioner.
Mrs. M H Mhatre, APP for the Respondents/State.
CORAM : S. S. SHINDE,
N. J. JAMADAR, JJ
DATE : 03rd September 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S. S. SHINDE, J)
1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the
lgc 1 of 7
(4) judgment cri.wp-2399.19.odt
consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2 By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks direction to
Respondents/Authorities to send the Petitioner in Open Prison, by quashing
and setting aside the order dated 12/04/2017 passed by Respondent No.1 -
Inspector General of Prison, Pune. The Petitioner also seeks directions to
Respondents/Authorities to give remission for the period from 27/01/2017 till
day he is again transferred to Open Prison.
3 The issue that arises for our consideration in this Petition is
whether the Respondents/Authorities without giving any show cause notice,
without providing any opportunity of hearing and without giving copy of
impugned order to the Petitioner, transfer him from Open Prison to Closed
Prison.
4 It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner is convicted by the
judgment dated 21/02/2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sangli in
Sessions Case No.160 of 2005 for the offences punishable under Sections 302,
307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment.
The Petitioner has undergone near about 13 years of actual imprisonment, and
considering the good behaviour, he was transferred from Yerwada Central
Prison to Visapur Open Prison on 23/01/2016. It is the case of the Petitioner
lgc 2 of 7
(4) judgment cri.wp-2399.19.odt
that on 22/01/2017 the Respondent No.3 was on leave and the charge was
handed over to senior jail officer. On that day, at about 11.15 am the said
senior jail officer asked the Petitioner that, why the Petitioner had stopped the
work and talked with him in a vulgar language. It is further the case of the
Petitioner that, when the Petitioner asked the said jail officer not to use vulgar
language, the said jail officer had filed a false complaint against the Petitioner
on 22/01/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, and again on 25/01/2017 for the offence under Section
353 of the Indian Penal Code with the Belvadi Police Station. Thereafter, the
Respondent No.2 on 27/01/2017 had, without following the procedure,
directly transferred the Petitioner in closed prison at Yerawada. Thereafter the
Respondent No.1 had issued impugned letter dated 12/04/2017 to the
Respondent Nos.2 to 4 mentioning therein that as per the decision taken by the
selection committee on 24/03/2017 the Petitioner has to be transferred from
Open Prison Visapur to closed prison Kolhapur at Kalamba.
It is the case of the Petitioner that he had filed an application
under Right to Information Act thereby calling upon the
Respondents/Authorities to furnish the information regarding the classification
committee, however, it was informed to the Petitioner that since 01/02/2016
to 01/01/2017 no committee was formed. The conduct of the Petitioner in
Open Prison was satisfactory and, the Respondent No.3 had proposed his name
lgc 3 of 7
(4) judgment cri.wp-2399.19.odt
for getting special remission for 90 days to Respondent No.1. Hence the
Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for the reliefs as stated herein above.
5 The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that
while issuing the impugned order/letter dated 12/04/2017, no procedure as
laid down in Open Prison Rules was followed by the Respondents/Authorities.
It is submitted that the Petitioner was not placed before the committee. It is
also submitted that there was no misconduct on the part of the Petitioner
during the period from 01/02/2016 to 01/01/2017. In the open prison,
Visapur, the Petitioner had satisfactorily completed the work allotted to him. It
is further submitted that during the process of transferring the Petitioner from
Open Prison, Visapur to Central Prison, Yerawada, the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3
have not followed the procedure as provided under the law. It is submitted
that, the Petitioner was transferred from Open Prison Visapur to Central
Prision, Yerawada, Pune without giving any notice and without giving any
opportunity of hearing and, therefore, there was violation of principles of
natural justice. The learned counsel for the Petitioner therefore prays that the
Petition may be allowed.
6 The learned APP appearing for the Respondents/State support the
impugned order/letter. She submitted that the Petitioner was present before
the Jail Selection Committee through Video Conferencing. The Petitioner had
lgc 4 of 7
(4) judgment cri.wp-2399.19.odt
been transferred from Open Prison to Closed Prison, on the basis of the
decision taken in the said meeting of the Jail Selection Committee. She,
therefore, submitted that the transfer of the Petitioner from Open Prison to
Closed Prison was in accordance with the procedure provided under law. The
learned APP therefore submitted that the Petition may be dismissed.
7 We have given our due consideration to the submissions made by
the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned APP for the
Respondents/State. With their able assistance we have carefully perused the
pleadings and the grounds taken in the Writ Petition and the annexures
thereto.
8 In support of her submission that after following proper
procedure, the Petitioner was transferred from Open Prision to Closed Prison,
the learned APP appearing for the Respondents/State invites our attention to
Exhibit-R-I annexed at Page 77 of the Writ Paper Book. We have carefully
perused the said document Exhibit-R-I. Exhibit-R-I is the minutes of the
meeting of Jail Selection Committee held on 24/03/2017 through video
conferencing. It is noted in the said minutes that the charge on the Petitioner
with another Prisoner Vijay Pandurang Waghmare was about the misconduct.
The Jail Selection Committee had also taken into consideration the act of the
Petitioner and the said Vijay about the alleged assault on the jail officer and the
lgc 5 of 7
(4) judgment cri.wp-2399.19.odt
staff, and the FIR being CR No.09/2017 registered against them with Belvandi
Police Station. The Jail Selection Committee after considering the misconduct,
mis-behaviour of the Petitioner, and the alleged act committed by the
Petitioner, came to a conclusion that the Petitioner has infringed the Rules of
the Prison Act. According to the Jail Selection Committee, the said offence of
the Petitioner is a serious offence and he was found to be guilty. The Jail
Selection Committee, therefore, had taken a decision to cancel the facility of
Open Prision to the Petitioner and transferred him to Closed Prision. It appears
that the said meeting was conducted through video conferencing and, the
Petitioner had attended the proceedings before the said committee through
video conferencing and, therefore, the contention of the Petitioner that no
notice was given to him is not sustainable. The said minutes of the meeting
have been signed by the Chairman and the Members of the Jail Selection
Committee.
9 It is required to be noted that the said selection committee has
considered the case of the Petitioner and reached to the conclusion that the
Petitioner is guilty of the alleged act on his part. The said committee has also
noted that the conduct of the Petitioner dis-entitles him from seeking any relief
much less the reliefs claimed in this Petition. The act attributed to the
Petitioner is not a simple act but he had tried to assault the officers and
employees working in the open prison by a sharp weapon. It is not necessary to
lgc 6 of 7
(4) judgment cri.wp-2399.19.odt
elaborate the reasons as the competent committee consisting of four members
held that the Petitioner is found guilty of misconduct and, therefore, he needs
to be kept in closed prison and, his lodgement in open prison stands cancelled.
The fact that the Petitioner is convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, cannot be lost sight of.
10 We are of the considered view that impugned order dated
12/04/2017 passed by the Respondent No.1 herein thereby communicating the
decision of the committee transferring the Petitioner from Open Prison Visapur
to closed Prison, Kolhapur Central Prison at Kalamba, is proper and does not
required intereference at the hands of this Court in its writ jurisdiction.
11 Since the prayer of the Petitioner to send him in Open Prison is
rejected, the question of giving remission from 27/01/2017 till the day he is
again transferred to Open Prison, does not arise and the said prayer to also
stand rejected.
12 For the reasons stated in the foregoing paragraphs, we are not
inclined to grant any relief in favour of the Petitioner. The Writ Petition stands
rejected.
[N. J. JAMADAR, J] [S. S. SHINDE , J]
lgc 7 of 7
