Bombay High Court
Bablu @ Rameshwar S/O Kuwarsing ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 14 September, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar
1 52-wp-563-21j.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 563 OF 2021
Bablu @ Rameshwar S/o. Kuwarsing Sanodiya,
Aged 34, Convict No. C-5743,
(Presently at Central Prison, Amravati)
Dist. Amravati. . . . PETITIONER
...V E R S U S..
1. State of Maharashtra through
D.I.G., Prison (East), Nagpur.
2. The Superintendent of Central
Prison, Amravati, Dist. Amravati. . . . RESPONDENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri A. Y. Sharma, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms. N. R. Tripathi, A.P. P. for respondents/State.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM :- V. M. DESHPANDE AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED :- 14.09.2021
JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :-
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of the parties.
3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 24.12.2020 passed
by the respondent no. 1 on the ground that Police verification report is
adverse to the petitioner.
2 52-wp-563-21j.odt
4. The petitioner is a convict for offence punishable under
Sections 120B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 25, 27
of the Arms Act and has been directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment
for life.
5. On the date of filing of the application for furlough leave,
the petitioner had undergone imprisonment for a period of 3 years, 8
months and 6 days. The petitioner on 17.06.2020 filed an application
for furlough leave however, the respondent no. 1 on 24.12.2020
rejected the said application on the ground that there is possibility of
breach of peace in the said area. The petitioner has therefore filed the
present petition challenging the order dated 24.12.2020.
6. This Court on 17.08.2021 issued notice to the
respondents. The respondent no. 2, in pursuance of the said notice
filed reply stating that the Superintendent of Police, Shivani, Dist.
Sheoni (M.P.) has submitted that Police verification report vide letter
dated 10.08.2020, which is adverse to the petitioner. It is stated that
as per the said report, Sarpanch of village Lakhanwada has taken
objection for release of the petitioner.
7. We have carefully scrutinized the impugned order, Police
report dated 10.08.2020 and the reply filed by the respondent no. 2.
On scrutiny of the impugned order, it appears that the application of
3 52-wp-563-21j.odt
the petitioner for release on furlough leave has been rejected on the
ground that the said report is adverse to the petitioner. In our opinion,
Rule 4(4) of the Maharashtra Prisons (Mumbai Furlough and Parole)
Rules, 1959 cannot be mechanically applied in case Police verification
report is adverse. It the Police report is adverse and discloses no
material or existence of any material for arriving at adverse conclusion,
the Authority is not justified in rejecting the furlough leave application.
On scrutiny of the reply along with its Annexures and the reasons
stated in the impugned order, we do not find any material based on
which apprehension as expressed in the report of the Superintendent
of Police is justified. Neither the impugned order nor the Police report
refers to the material, which on its perusal, would justify the
apprehension expressed by the Authority having any reasonable
foundation.
8. We, therefore, pass the following order:-
(i) The impugned order dated 24.12.2020 passed by the
respondent no. 1 rejecting the furlough leave application of petitioner
is quashed and set aside.
(ii) The respondent no. 1 is directed to grant furlough leave
to the petitioner for a period of 21 days upon such conditions, as may
be permissible in terms of the Rules, within one week from the date of
receipt of this order.
4 52-wp-563-21j.odt
Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
JUDGE JUDGE
RR Jaiswal
