Abdul Nadeem Abdul Majid vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Dig ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 25937 Bom

Bombay High Court

Abdul Nadeem Abdul Majid vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Dig ... on 20 September, 2024

Author: Vinay Joshi

Bench: Vinay Joshi

2024:BHC-NAG:10711-DB




               Judgment                                                   922 wp554.24

                                                   1

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
                             NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
                           CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 554/2024

                   Abdul Nadeem Abdul Majid,
                   aged 36, Convict No. C-6229,
                   Central Prison, Amravati,
                   Dist. Amravati.

                                                            ...     PETITIONER
                                              VERSUS

              1.   State of Maharashtra through
                   D.I.G. Prison (East), Nagpur.

              2.   The Superintendent of Central,
                   Amravati, Dist. Amravati.

                                                            ... RESPONDENTS

                                      ---------------------------------
                              Mr. A.Y. Sharma, Advocate for petitioner.
                          Mrs. N. Tripathi, APP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

                                     ----------------------------------
                                      CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND
                                                      MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
                                      DATE      : 20.09.2024.


              ORAL JUDGMENT (PER VINAY JOSHI, J.) :

Heard.

Judgment 922 wp554.24

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. The petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable

under Sections 307, 279, 338 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to

suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. The petitioner has undergone

sentence for the period more than one year. The petitioner has applied for

grant of furlough leave which was rejected vide impugned order dated

30.04.2024 passed by respondent No.1 D.I.G. Prison, Nagpur.

4. The petition is resisted by reply on two counts. The petitioner

has not furnished name of surety to the satisfaction of the authority and

there is adverse Police Report. The learned APP submits that the

petitioner's nephew is murdered, therefore there is likelihood that petitioner

may commit an offence or there is danger to his life. We have gone through

the Police Report which states that if the petitioner is released, there are

chances of abscondence. The petitioner is having tendency of committing

offences and there is murder in his family.

5. The petitioner has statutory right to get released on furlough

leave for the purpose of assimilating in the society and maintaining the Judgment 922 wp554.24

relation with the family. The report itself indicate that the petitioner's

conduct in Jail is appropriate. The adverse report is nothing, but mere

speculation without specifying instances. Hence, the impugned rejection is

not sustainable in the eyes of law. As regards to the surety is concerned,

always it should be to the satisfaction of the authority.

6. In view of above, petition is allowed. We hereby quash and set

aside impugned order dated 30.04.2024. We direct the authority to pass

appropriate order of releasing petitioner on furlough leave by imposing

conditions which they deem fit. The authority shall also impose a condition

that the petitioner shall attend concerned Police Station on every

Wednesday and Sunday in between 10.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. during the

period of furlough leave.

7. Petition stands disposed of in above terms.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.) Gohane

Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 26/09/2024 18:04:09