Namdev Mahadev Tejan, Convict No. C-6776, Central Prison Nagpur v. The D.I.G. Prison (E) (R), Nagpur And Another

1 wp954.14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No. 954 of 2014 [Namdev Mahadev Tejne (in jail) Vs. The D.I.G. Prison(E)(R), Nagpur & anr.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Ms. S. B. Saikhede, Advocate for petitioner (appointed) Ms. T. H. Udeshi, APP for respondents CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI AND P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATE : 09-01-2015.

Heard learned counsel for rival parties.

We have perused the reply. Para 7 of the reply reads as under :

"7.

The following chart showing the details of the petitioner is as under :

Sr.

No.

Particulars Date of release Date of surrendered Remarks Furlough leave (two weeks) 1.4.2008 Not surrendered on due date Surrendered himself late by 19 days i.e.

on 19.5.2008

2 wp954.14 Furlough leave (two weeks and extended of 14 days) 19.9.200 Not surrendered on due date Surrendered himself but late by 60 days i.e. on 16.2.2009 Furlough leave (two weeks) 8.5.2010 Not surrendered on due date Surrendered himself but late by 16 days i.e. on 22.6.2010 19.1.200 Not surrendered on due date Surrendered himself but late by 31 days i.e. on 21.3.2007 Parole Leave (30 days) & Extended 60 days Parole Leave (30 days) 5.10.201 Not surrendered on due date Surrendered himself but late by 153 days i.e. on 7.5.2011 From the chart, it appears that petitioner surrendered every time late and has been consistent in his habit of not reporting honestly on the returnable date.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fact that every time, the petitioner surrendered himself and not brought to jail must be in his favour. We do not agree with the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.

3 wp954.14 It is seen that since 2007, the petitioner has developed the habit of reporting late to the prison. The conduct of the petitioner, in fact, consistently reporting late to the prison must result into denial of his prayer. That being so, we make the following order.

ORDER

(i) Criminal Writ Petition No. 954/2014 is rejected with liberty to the petitioner to apply in future in accordance with law.

(ii) Fees of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is quantified at Rs. 1,500/-. Judge Judge wasnik