1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No.139 of 2009. AND Criminal Writ Petition No.140 of 2009. Shankar Ukandrao Marbate Vs. The State of Mah. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances,Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri Anoop Parihar APP for State.. Coram: A. H. JOSHI AND R. C. CHAVAN, JJ. Dated: 12th March 2009. 1. It is seen that there are four different letter petitions. Three out of those are together treated as Writ Petition NO.139 of 2009 and fourth is treated as Writ Petition No.140 of 2009. 2. The common grievance as is seen all through is as follows: (a) About 7 persons, who had overstayed the parole or reported late and or were brought before the Jail authorities upon arrest, were granted furlough or parole by 2 granting favour. (b) The petitioner's mother is sick, and he needs furlough. Adverse report has been furnished against the petitioner. (c) The adverse police report is sent though the demand of illegal gratification was fulfilled. 3. We direct the learned APP to furnish the copies of all complaints which are treated as one writ petition to the Superintendent of Police, Nagpur (Rural) in order that the contents can be scrutinized properly before calling of report. 4. We direct the Superintendent of Police, Nagpur (Rural) to cause an independent investigation through any Officer not below the rank of Inspector of Police about genuineness of grounds of furlough applied for. Such Officer shall conduct the enquiry without the knowledge of the constables or officers, who had earlier furnished the report, and furnish his report to Superintendent of Police, Nagpur (Rural) within the one week and the Superintendent of Police, Nagpur (Rural) shall in turn furnish the same before this Court within two weeks from today. 3 5. We find that whenever the dates are fixed by this Court for submission of reports, the directions are not complied with by the Officers concerned. Even the concerned officers do not take efforts to approach the Public Prosecutor seeking extension of time in regard to compliance. 6. We find that this approach needs to deprecated and that the compliance/reply be furnished within time specified by us. 7. Stand over to 4-4-2009. 8. Steno copy is allowed. JUDGE JUDGE Sbm