1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 295 OF 2011 (Rajendra Shivaji Dongre vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Dr. U. K. Kalsi with Mrs. S.P. Kulkarni, Advocates for the petitioner. Shri T.A. Mirza, APP for the respondents. ….. CORAM : MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & M.L. TAHALIYANI, JJ. MAY 04, 2011. Heard Dr. Kalsi with Mrs. Kulkarni, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mirza, learned APP for the respondents. The petitioner is undergoing Life imprisonment in Amravati Central Prison. The case of the petitioner is that on five occasions, he was released on furlough or parole. On the third occasion, when he was released on furlough, he was late by 96 days and therefore, prison punishment of cutting of remission of 5 days for each day of overstay was imposed. In relation to this overstay, his prayer is that the punishment be reduced in the ratio of cutting of remission of one day for each day of overstay. The further case of the petitioner is that on the fifth occasion when he was released from jail, he was late by 84 days in reporting 2 back to prison, hence, has has received a show cause notice wherein it is stated that for this late surrender, punishment of cutting of remission of five days for each day of overstay is proposed. The case of the petitioner is that he has replied to the said show cause notice but he has not been informed about any decision taken thereon. Being aggrieved by this fact also, this petition is preferred. The record pertaining to the petitioner shows that he was released on parole leave on 03.10.2006. He did not surrender in time and there was 60 days delay in reporting back to the prison. On second occasion, when he was released on furlough on 30.11.2007, on this occasion he did not surrender back in time. Thereafter the petitioner was released on parole on 12.06.2008, he was late by 96 days in reporting back to prison. The prayer in the petition is to direct the respondents to reduce the jail punishment of 1/5 days to 1/1 day for the period of overstay. Thereafter the petitioner was again released from jail on 23.05.2009 and again he surrendered late in the prison. On 22.02.2010, the petitioner was again released from jail but he did not report back in time, he was late by 84 days. Hence, a show cause notice referred to above was issued. As far as show cause notice is concerned, as the petitioner has replied to the said show cause notice. The concerned authorities to consider the reply of the petitioner and dispose of the matter as expeditiously as 3 possible in accordance with law. No further directions are required as far as show cause notice is concerned. As far as the punishment of reduction of remission in the ratio of five days for each day of overstay to 1 day for each day of overstay on account of overstay of 96 days is concerned, it is seen that on earlier two occasions when the petitioner was released on parole and furlough, though he did not surrender in time, remission of only one day for each day of overstay was cut, and this was the third time that he did not report back to prison in time. Though the petitioner was given one more chance, his conduct did not improve. In fact his period of overstay went on increasing. Hence, we do not see any fault on the part of the jail authorities for cutting remission of five days for each day of overstay. The conduct of the petitioner disentitles him to any leniency. Moreover, it is to be noted that the record shows that after following the due procedure, the remission was cut. In our view, no case is made out for interference. Petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE *GS.