Bombay High Court
Kisansingh Shersingh Bavari vs Special Police Inspector General ... on 8 January, 2024
Author: Vinay Joshi
Bench: Vinay Joshi
2024:BHC-NAG:297-DB
1 922.wp.738.23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 738 OF 2023
Kisansingh Shersingh Bavari (C-2515),
Aged about 40 Years, Occ. : N.A.
R/o. Samata Nagar, Gitti Khdan, Wardha,
Tah. & Distt. Wardha. ... PETITIONER
...VERSUS...
1. Special Police Inspector General (Prison),
East Region, Nagpur.
2. Superintendent of Jail,
Central Prison, Amravati, ... RESPONDENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. R. A. Singh, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms. N. R. Tripathi, A.P.P. for respondents/State.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND
MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATED :- 08.01.2024
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : VINAY JOSHI, J.):-
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. The petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable
under Section 302, 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The
petitioner has applied for grant of regular furlough. However, it has been
rejected by the respondent No.1 vide order dated 20.07.2023. The
2 922.wp.738.23.odt
respondent has rejected the application by contending that in past as and
when the petitioner was released on parole/furlough, he never surrendered
on due date. The offence was registered under Section 224 of the Indian
Penal Code. The respondent No.2 explained that in terms of Rule 4(4) of
the Prisoners (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, the petitioner is
not eligible as his release is not recommended by the Jail Authority.
Moreover, in terms of Section 4(10) of the said Rules, the petitioner is also
not eligible since he never surrendered within stipulated period.
3. We have examined the entire material. It reveals that in past,
the petitioner was released in the year 2005 and 2011. Both the times, he
did not surrender, hence, required to be brought back by way of arrest.
However, thereafter, despite such lapses, the respondent No.1 has released
the petitioner on regular parole vide order dated 18.08.2020 and then on
death parole on 12.06.2021. Undisputedly, on both occasions, the petitioner
had surrendered on due date. Thereafter, the petitioner was released on
covid parole but he surrendered late. It is stated that during pandemic
situation, no specific time was given for return and thus, the petitioner was
not aware about the date of return.
4. Taking overall view of the matter, it reveals that though in past
there were lapses, however, thereafter, the petitioner has surrendered on
3 922.wp.738.23.odt
due date. The very object of grant of furlough is that the prisoner shall be
socialized and become a good human being. Considering that the petitioner
has surrendered on the due date during last two release, we deem it
appropriate to exercise our discretion for granting furlough.
5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed.
6. We hereby quashed and set aside the impugned order dated
20.07.2023.
7. The Authority respondent No.1 - Special Police Inspector General
(Prison) shall pass an appropriate order for grant furlough leave within four
weeks by imposing suitable conditions as he deems fit.
8. Rule is made absolute in above terms.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Signed by: Mrs. R.M. MANDADERGurnule
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 10/01/2024 12:14:59
