Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Shuddodhan @ Sudhakar Sukhdev Ramteke ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. The Deputy ... on 29 January, 2018

Author: R. K. Deshpande

Bench: R. K. Deshpande, M.G.Giratkar

                                             1              26judcwp1060.17.odt

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

                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1060 OF 2017


            Sudhakar Sukhdev Ramteke,
            Convict No. 498,
            Aged Major, Occ. Nil,
            Confined at Open Prison, 
            Morshi, Dist. Amravati              ........                     PETITIONER

                                  ...VERSUS...

 1]         State of Maharashtra through
            the Deputy Inspector Gender of Prison,
            Eastern Region, Nagpur.

 2]         The Superintendent,
            Open Prison, Morshi, 
            Dist. Amravati.                    ......               RESPONDENTS

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ku. S. B. Saikhede, Advocate for the petitioner.
 Ms. N. R. Tripathi, Additional Government Pleader for respondents.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE AND
                                        M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
                                          th
                           Date      : 29     JANUARY, 2018 .

  JUDGMENT ( Per R. K. Deshpande, J.)

Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2] The petitioner is undergoing the sentence for life imprisonment for the offences punishable under Sections ::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2018 02:03:58 ::: 2 26judcwp1060.17.odt 302, 636 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is undergoing life imprisonment and has completed ten years period in the prison.

3] The application for grant of furlough leave is rejected under the provisions of Rule 4(4)(10) of the Bombay (Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was released on furlough leave on 21.02.2012, but he did not report the prison on due date and he was required to be arrested after 35 days on 18.04.2012. The petitioner was thereafter, again released on furlough leave on 25.05.2015, but he surrendered late by 14 days on 23.06.2015. There is no permanent debarment for claiming the furlough leave on the ground that while availing the earlier period of leave, he was required to be arrested. The period of six months has expired from the last surrendered of the petitioner on 23.06.2015. In terms and condition of Rule 9 of Bombay (Furlough and Parole) Rules, 2016, the petitioner cannot therefore, be denied furlough leave. 4] In view of above, writ petition is allowed. The order dated 04.09.2017 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prison, is hereby quashed and set aside. The ::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2018 02:03:58 ::: 3 26judcwp1060.17.odt petitioner is entitled to leave for a period of 28 days from 12 th February, 2018 subject to terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Competent Authority for releasing him on furlough leave. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to report on the due date upon expiry of furlough leave, his further leave for a period of 28 days shall stand forfeited.

                                JUDGE                         JUDGE

 Gohane




::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2018                           ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2018 02:03:58 :::