Kiran Umaraoji Kaithe vs Deputy Inspector General Of ... on 12 May, 2020

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Kiran Umaraoji Kaithe vs Deputy Inspector General Of ... on 12 May, 2020

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 BOM 667

Bench: Pushpa V. Ganediwala

   WP 28.2020                             1



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 28 OF 2020

  Kiran Umaraoji Kaithe,
  aged about 39 years,
  R/o Bhande Plot,
  In front of Shankar Sai Math, Nagpur
  (Police Station, Sakkardara, Nagpur)
  (C/5518, Central Prison, Amravati).
                                                              ...PETITIONER
                    Versus

  1. Deputy Inspector General of Prison (East Region),
     Nagpur.

  2. The Superintendent of Jail,
     Central Prison, Amravati.
                                                          ...RESPONDENTS

  Ms. S.B. Khobragade, Advocate for the petitioner.
  Shri N.R. Rode, A.P.P. for the respondents.
                     .....

                               CORAM : PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.
                               DATED : 12/05/2020.

  ORAL JUDGMENT.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.

2. The petitioner - a life convict for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 has approached this Court for grant of ::: Uploaded on - 13/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2020 04:07:34 ::: WP 28.2020 2 furlough leave of 28 days, as his application for furlough leave was rejected by respondent No.1 vide impugned order dated 07/12/2019 on the ground that the petitioner is associated with the gang of one Raju Bhadre and that the petitioner had committed offence under the Arms Act, while on bail.

3. I have perused the impugned order dated 07/12/2019, the reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2/State and the police report.

4. At the outset, the reply filed on behalf of the State does not reflect any gross previous misconduct during his period in jail. Undisputedly, the petitioner is otherwise eligible to be released on furlough leave.

5. Looking to the objects of granting furlough and parole leave to the convicts as amended as per Rule 1(A) which was inserted vide notification dated 16/04/2018 in the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 so also looking to the present situation of outbreak of pandemic due to the ::: Uploaded on - 13/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2020 04:07:34 ::: WP 28.2020 3 COVID-19, in my opinion, with stringent conditions, he shall be released on furlough leave. I pass the following order :-

ORDER

1. The Criminal Writ Petition is allowed.

2. The order dated 07/12/2019 passed by respondent No.1 is quashed and set aside.

3. Respondent No.1 is directed to release the petitioner on furlough leave on such terms and conditions as may be found suitable by respondent No.1.

4. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

5. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.

JUDGE Sumit.

::: Uploaded on - 13/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2020 04:07:34 :::

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Bombay High Court