Sachin Sukhdeo Jaronde (In Jail) v. Deputy Inspector General Of Prison (East Region) Nagpur And Another

WP66-18 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 66/2018 (SACHIN SUKHDEO JARONDE (IN JAIL) VERSUS THE DY.INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISON (E)(R), NAGPUR & ANOTHER) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms S.B. Khobragade, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. N.R. Tripathi, A.P.P. for the R-1 & 2.

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : MARCH 16 , 2018.

By this criminal writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the D.I.G. Prisons, dated 16.08.2017 rejecting the application of the petitioner for furlough leave. We are not inclined to interfere with the order of the D.I.G. Prisons in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. The order appears to be correct. In the year 2009, 2010 and 2012, when the petitioner was released on furlough leave, he had returned 12 days, 156 days and 1600 days respectively after the due date. It appears that the petitioner was required to be brought to the prison by the police authorities after 1600 days when he was released in the year 2012. Immediately after he was apprehended and again put in the prison, the petitioner has sought for furlough leave. It would be necessary for the petitioner to mend his ways.

The petitioner would be required to remain in prison for at least some time, viz. a couple of years, before seeking furlough leave. We do not find any illegality in the impugned order as the furlough leave application is rejected as the petitioner had absconded for nearly five years when he was released on furlough leave in the year 2012 and was required to be brought back to the prison after arrest.

WP66-18 Since the order appears to be just and proper, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE APTE