IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 69 OF 2011 MR. CLIVE ELLENS, PRESENTLY LODGED AT CENTRAL JAIL, AGUADA GOA, THROUGH HIS MOTHER MS. EUNICE ELLENS ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. G. Teles, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. M. S. Joshi, Special Public Prosecutor for the Respondents. Coram:- F. M. REIS, J. Date:- 1st December, 2011 ORAL ORDER Heard Shri Teles, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Shri Joshi, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the Respondents. 2. The above Petition challenges the Memorandum dated 25.04.2011 passed by the Respondent no.2 whereby the application filed by the Petitioner dated 06.04.2011 for furlough came to be rejected. 3. Shri Teles, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner assailed the impugned Order and pointed out that the Furlough has been rejected only on the ground that the Petitioner is facing trial in another case before learned J.M.F.C., 'B' Court at Panaji. Learned Counsel has further pointed out that merely because the Petitioner is undergoing such trial by itself cannot be a ground to reject the furlough to the Petitioner. The learned Counsel further pointed out that even in the said case pending before the learned J.M.F.C., the Petitioner has been released on bail and, as such, the question of refusing furlough on that count would not arise at all. The learned Counsel has taken me through the impugned Order and pointed out that the Respondent no.2 has not at all considered the Goa Prison Rules, 2006, whilst disposing of the application filed by the Petitioner. 4. On the other hand, Shri Joshi, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondents has supported the impugned Order and pointed out that the fact that the Petitioner was released on bail was not brought to the notice of the Respondent no.2 at the time of disposing of the application filed by the Petitioner. Learned Special Public Prosecutor further pointed out that the Petitioner has not even brought to the notice of the Respondent no.2 the fact that he was undergoing a trial before the said J.M.F.C. Learned Special Public Prosecutor further pointed out that considering Rule 313 of the Goa Prison Rules, 2006, the Petitioner is not entitled for furlough. The learned Special Public Prosecutor further pointed out that there is no bar for a prisoner to seek furlough even in cases where they are facing trial in another case if they are otherwise entitled in law for such relief. Learned Special Public Prosecutor as such submits that the material sought to be produced by the Petitioner can be directed to be considered by the Respondent no.2 so as to decide the application filed by the Petitioner afresh in accordance with law. 5. Having heard the learned Counsel and on perusal of the relevant provisions of law, I find that Rule 313 of the Goa Prison Rules, 2006, provide specific situation in which a prisoner is not entitled for furlough. On perusal of the said provisions, both the Counsel are justified to contend that merely because a prisoner is facing a trial in another Criminal case by itself does not disentitle such person to seek for furlough. But however, such prisoner can always be refused furlough in cases in which they come within any of the specific situation contemplated in Rule 313 of the Goa Prison Rules, 2006. 6. In the present case, I find that the Respondent no.2 whilst considering the application filed by the Petitioner for furlough has not considered whether the Petitioner would otherwise be entitled for furlough and/or whether the Petitioner is not entitled for furlough within the specific provisions of Rule 313 of the Goa Prison Rules, 2006. As such, it would be appropriate in the interest of justice that the Respondent no.2 be directed to decide the application filed by the Petitioner dated 06.04.2011 afresh in accordance with law. 7. In view of the above, I pass the following : O R D E R (i) The impugned Order dated 25.04.2011 is quashed and set aside. (ii) Respondent no.2 is directed to decide the application dated 06.04.2011 filed by the Petitioner for furlough afresh in accordance with law. (iii) Petition stands disposed of accordingly. F. M. REIS, J. arp/*