Bombay High Court
Chhaburao Kacharu Jare vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 11 October, 2017
Author: V.K.Tahilramani
Bench: V.K.Tahilramani, M.S.Karnik
jdk 1 17.crwp.2759.17.j.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2759 OF 2017
Chhaburao Kacharu Jare ]
Age 43 years, Occ: Nil ]
R/o Chandakapur, Taluka Rahuri, ]
Dist. Ahmednagar, ]
Prisoner No. C/14337. ]
At present in the Yerawada Central ]
Prison, Pune. ].. Petitioner
Vs.
1) The State of Maharashtra ]
Through P.P. High Court, ]
Mumbai ]
]
2) The Superintendent, ]
Yerawada Central Prison, Pune ].. Respondents
....
Ms. Ankita Naik Advocate i/b Mrs. Indrayani M. Koparkar
Advocate for Petitioner
Mr. Arfan Sait A.P.P. for the State
....
CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
M.S.KARNIK, JJ.
DATED : OCTOBER 11, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. ]:
1 Heard both sides. The prayer of the petitioner is that he be transferred to open prison.
1 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:19:00 :::
jdk 2 17.crwp.2759.17.j.doc
2 The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that
the Selection committee which met in the year 2010, had found the petitioner fit for being sent to open prison, however, the petitioner has not been sent to open prison. 3 The learned A.P.P. placed reliance on the affidavit of Shri. Kurlekar, Deputy Superintendent, Yerawada Central Prison, Pune. This affidavit shows that in the year 2010, Selection committee had considered the petitioner's case for selection to open prison and found him fit. At that time, there was no vacancy in the open prison, hence,he was placed on the waiting list. He was placed at Sr. No. 779 of the waiting list as per his seniority. On 16.11.2013 a communication was issued by the Office of the Additional Director General (Prisons) Pune directing the Superintendent to confirm and report back whether prisoners selected and approved for confinement in open prison as per the waiting list were eligible for selection as per Rule 4(ii) ( c ) of the Maharashtra Open Prisons Rules, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "Open Prison Rules). Thereafter the record of the petitioner was examined and it was found that on 12.10.2010 2 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:19:00 ::: jdk 3 17.crwp.2759.17.j.doc when the petitioner was released on parole, he overstayed for a period of 77 days on account of which, prison punishment of cutting of remission of 4 days for each day of overstay was imposed. Thus, remission of 385 days was cut. Thereafter on 14.6.2012 the petitioner was again released on parole for a period of 30 days and he overstayed. On account of that, 10 days of remission was cut. Thereafter it is stated that the petitioner was selected for the post of Convict Night Watchman. On 15.8.2010 when the petitioner was on duty as Convict Night Watchman in Barrack No.7 from 9 p.m. to 12 midnight, another Convict Balasaheb Bajaba Pawar escaped from the barrack and jail premises by cutting open iron grill windows. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was issued a show-cause notice and disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner was punished by permanently removing him from the post of Convict Night Watchman by the Superintendent of Yerawada Central Prison. The said prison offence was granted appraisal by the Sessions Court, Pune.
4 The learned A.P.P. placed reliance on Rule 4(ii)(c) of the Open Prison Rules which reads as under:
3 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:19:00 ::: jdk 4 17.crwp.2759.17.j.doc "Rule 4(ii) The following prisoners shall not normally be sent for confinement in an open prison:-
(a) ........
(b) ........
(c ) prisoners who are awarded three or more
major punishments for prison offences during the last two years, prior to the date of selection"
The learned A.P.P. pointed out that though the petitioner was selected for confinement to open prison by the Selection committee, it was not a final order and further as per Rule 5(v) of the Open Prison Rules, the list of the prisoners prepared for sending them to open prison has to be approved and then the selected prisoners would be sent to open prison as early as possible. Rule 5(v) of the said Rules reads as under:
"5(v) The Selection Committee shall select such prisoners as are eligible for being confined in open prison under Rule (4), and submit a list of selected prisoners for the approval of the Inspector General of Prisons. On list being approved, the selected prisoners shall as soon as possible be transferred for confinement in the open prison."
It is further submitted that the final approval was 4 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:19:00 ::: jdk 5 17.crwp.2759.17.j.doc granted by the Additional D.I.G. (Prisons) on 16.11.2013 to prisoners who are eligible. As three major punishments were awarded to the petitioner in the year 2011 to 2013 i.e. two for two overstays and one in relation to the prisoner escaping from the prison when the petitioner was Convict Night Watchman, the petitioner was ineligible as per Rule 4(ii)(c) of the Open Prison Rules.
5 Facts of this case clearly show that the petitioner was awarded three major punishments during last two years prior to the date of selection which took place on 16.11.2013, hence, as per Rule 4(ii)( c ) the petitioner cannot be sent to open prison. In this view of the matter, no case is made out for interference, hence, petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. [ M.S.KARNIK, J.] [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] kandarkar 5 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:19:00 :::