Bombay High Court
Dyaneshwar Balkrushna Yerme (In Jail) vs The Superintendent, Central Prison ... on 28 June, 2018
Author: P.N.Deshmukh
Bench: P.N.Deshmukh, M.G.Giratkar
1 wp1237.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1237 OF 2017
Dyaneshwar Balkrushna Yerme,
Aged adult, r/o. At Indira Nagar,
Warora Distt. Chandrapur
(Presently at Central Prison,
Nagpur C-9013). .......... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1. The Superintendent,
Central Prison, Nagpur.
2. The Deputy Inspector General
of Prisons (Eastern Region),
Nagpur. .......... RESPONDENTS
____________________________________________________________
Mr.D.S.Lambat, Adv. (appointed) for the Petitioner.
Ms H.N.Jaipurkar, A.P.P. for the Respondents.
____________________________________________________________
::: Uploaded on - 03/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2018 01:09:55 :::
2 wp1237.17.odt
CORAM : P.N.DESHMUKH
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : 28.6.2018.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per P.N.Deshmukh, J) :
1. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent of learned Counsel for the parties, heard finally.
2. By this petition, the petitioner prays for his release on furlough leave for 21 days.
3. According to affidavit-in-reply of respondent, petitioner is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(a) punishable under Section 4 and under Section 5 (m) r/w. Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and is sentenced to suffer ::: Uploaded on - 03/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2018 01:09:55 ::: 3 wp1237.17.odt rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents referred to relevant amended provisions of Rule 4(21) of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, which rule is re- produced as under :
"4.Eligibility for furlough :- All Indian prisoners except from following categories whose annual conduct reports are good shall be eligible for furlough :-
(1) to (20) ...........
(21) Those involved in sexual offences against minor and human trafficking. "
5. In view of above Rule, petitioner is thus not entitled to claim furlough leave. Similar view is taken by this Court in its earlier order dt.31.10.2017 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.777 of 2017 and petition for grant of furlough leave was rejected. ::: Uploaded on - 03/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2018 01:09:55 :::
4 wp1237.17.odt
6. In view of above said facts, we do not find any substance in the petition. Same is, therefore, dismissed.
7. Fees of learned Counsel appointed for the petitioner are quantified at Rs.1,500/-.
JUDGE JUDGE jaiswal ::: Uploaded on - 03/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2018 01:09:55 ::: 5 wp1237.17.odt ::: Uploaded on - 03/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2018 01:09:55 :::