Bombay High Court
Dinesh Kashinath Kasare vs Deputy Inspector General ... on 30 January, 2024
Author: Vinay Joshi
Bench: Vinay Joshi
2024:BHC-NAG:1295-DB
920.wp593.2023ud.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 593 OF 2023
Dinesh Kashinath Kasare
Convict No.C-655,
Aged about 38 years,
... Petitioner
Presently at Morshi Open Prison,
District - Amravati
Versus
1. Deputy Inspector General
(Prisons) (East), Nagpur.
2. The Superintendent of Jail,
Morshi Open Prison, ... Respondents
District - Amravati.
Mr. J.S. Chilotra, Advocate (appointed) for petitioner.
Ms. Nandita Tripathi, APP for respondent Nos.1 & 2.
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, AND
SMT. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 30.01.2024
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 been convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and
PAGE 1 OF 3
920.wp593.2023ud.odt
undergoing imprisonment for life. The petitioner has undergone near
about eight years of imprisonment and presently, he has been housed
in an open prison. The petitioner has first time applied for grant of
furlough leave, however, it has been rejected vide impugned
Communication dated 16.02.2023. Respondent No.1 - Deputy
Inspector of General Prisons (East), Nagpur, has rejected furlough
leave solely on the ground that the proposed surety is not ready to
accept the surety for the petitioner's release.
(3) The State resisted this application by filing a reply
affidavit. It is contended that the surety was not ready and despite
opportunity, the petitioner has not furnished the name of another
surety. Besides that, no other substantial ground has been canvassed
to reject furlough leave.
(4) Learned counsel for the petitioner has attracted our
attention to the proviso to Rule 6 of the (Bombay Furlough and Parole)
Rules, 1959, which invests discretion with the sanctioning authority to
dispense with the requirement of surety, in case, the prisoner is
confined in open prison. There is no dispute that the petitioner is
confined in the open prison which is evident from the impugned order
PAGE 2 OF 3
920.wp593.2023ud.odt
itself. We have taken a note that during last eight years, the petitioner
has not been released either on parole or furlough leave.
(5) In view of the above, to accomplish the purpose of
grant of furlough leave, we are inclined to exempt the condition of
surety as permissible under the Rules. The petition is allowed.
Impugned Communicated dated 16.02.2023 is hereby quash and set
aside. Respondent No.1-authority shall pass an appropriate order of
release of the petitioner on furlough leave by imposing suitable
conditions as it deems fit except the condition of surety.
(6) Necessary order shall be passed within four weeks
from the date of communication.
(7) The petition stands disposed of in above terms.
(8) Fees of appointed learned counsel be paid as per
rules.
[VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.] [VINAY JOSHI, J.]
Prity
Signed by: Mrs. Prity Gabhane PAGE 3 OF 3
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 02/02/2024 11:14:49
