Shubham Vilasrao Tayade vs Dy. Director General Of Police Prison ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 1140 Bom

Bombay High Court

Shubham Vilasrao Tayade vs Dy. Director General Of Police Prison ... on 17 January, 2024

Author: Vinay Joshi

Bench: Vinay Joshi

2024:BHC-NAG:734-DB
                                                                           17.wp582.2022jud.odt




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

                         CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 582 OF 2022

          Shubham Vilasrao Tayade
          Convict No.C-5749,
          Aged about 42 years,                                  ... Petitioner
          Detained in Central Prison,
          Amravati.

                           Versus
          1. Dy. Director General of Police,
          Prison and Reformation,
          Maharashtra State, Pune -1

          2. The Superintendent of Central Prison,
          Amravati.
                                                              ... Respondents


          Mr. I.V. Tambi, Advocate (appointed) for petitioner.
          Ms. Nandita Tripathi, APP for respondent Nos.1 & 2.

                                        CORAM :          VINAY JOSHI, AND
                                                         SMT. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
                                        DATE         :   17.01.2024


          ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER: Vinay Joshi,J)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

by consent of both the learned counsel for the parties.

(2) The petitioner has applied for providing coin box

facility. The said authority rejected the same by stating that since the

PAGE 1 OF 2

17.wp582.2022jud.odt

petitioner is not entitled for parole or furlough leave, he would not be

entitled for coin box facility.

(3) The said issue is squarely covered by the decision of

this Court in case of Amar Omvir Singh Rathi and anr. Vs. Dy. Director

General of Police, Maharashtra State, Pune and Ors. , in Criminal Writ

Petition No.745/2019 decided on 21.01.2020. We have no reason to

deviate from the view taken by this Court, hence, the petition deserves

to be allowed.

(4) For the reasons aforestated, we are inclined to allow

the petition and the same is accordingly allowed. The respondents are

directed to provide telephone facility to the petitioner in terms of

Circular dated 12.02.2019, provided they fulfill all other conditions

contained therein.

(5) Fees of appointed learned counsel be paid as per

rules.

[VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.] [VINAY JOSHI, J.]

Prity

Signed by: Mrs. Prity Gabhane PAGE 2 OF 2 Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 18/01/2024 18:41:49