Pradip Pandurang Suryavanshi v. Deputy Inspector General Of Prison And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1562 OF 2018 Pradip Pandurang Suryavanshi

...Petitioner

Versus

Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Mumbai & Ors.

...Respondents

Mrs. Pooja R. Thakur for Petitioner.

Mr. Arfan Sait - APP for State.

CORAM: SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, Acting C. J. & M. S. SONAK, J.

DATE : 11 APRIL 2018 P.C.

1] Heard both sides.

2] The petitioner has preferred an application for furlough on 7th July 2017. The said application was rejected by an order dated 30th January 2018. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has preferred this petition. 3] Against rejection of an application for furlough, remedy of appeal is provided. It is stated that the petitioner has preferred an appeal.

4] In this view of the matter, at this stage, we are not inclined to interfere. In case the order of the appellate authority is adverse to the petitioner, it will be open to him to prefer a fresh writ petition.

5] At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the daughter of the petitioner is getting married on 28th April 2018, hence she prayed that on this ground the petitioner may be released on furlough. Marriage of a close relative cannot be a ground on which furlough is granted, however, parole can be granted on such ground. 6] The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the application for parole has been preferred by the petitioner before the competent authority on this ground. However, no order has been passed thereon as of today. In case an application for parole has been received by the competent authority, looking to the urgency in the matter the said application be decided within a period of one week from today.

7] Thus as stated above, we are not inclined to grant

furlough on this ground. Prayer for furlough is rejected. However, as far as parole is concerned, Mr. Lahu T. Kanaskar, Jailor - II of Taloja Central Prison, who is present in the court, will communicate this order to the competent authority. The learned counsel for the petitioner also states that she will communicate this order to the competent authority for considering the application for parole expeditiously.

8] The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (M.S. SONAK, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) CHANDKA