1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Writ Petition No. 143/2009 Shivdas Vishram Dhakade, Convict No. C-1517 Central Prison, Amravati. ... Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the D.I.G. Prisons(E)(R) Nagpur. 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Amravati. ... Respondents .... Mr. Shriniwas Deshpande, Advocate ( appointed) for the petitioner. Mrs. Joshi, A.P.P. for the respondents. ..... CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ . DATE : 12/06/2009 JUDGMENT : (PER A.P.LAVANDE,J) Heard Mr. Shriniwas Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Joshi, learned A.P.P. for the 2 respondents. 2. Rule. 3. By consent of the parties heard forthwith. 4. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 8.9.2008 passed by the respondent no.1 rejecting furlough leave to the petitioner. 5. By order dated 8.9.2008 the respondent no.1 has rejected the furlough leave on the ground that the relatives of the deceased have expressed apprehension that the petitioner, in case, is released on furlough leave may retaliate and kill them. 6. Mr. Deshpande, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the earlier six occasions the petitioner was released on furlough and he did not misuse liberty granted to him. He further pointed out that the 3 petitioner hails from village Sayakheda where he is going to reside in case he is released on furlough whereas the relatives of the deceased hail from village Belkheda which is at the distance of 15 KM from Sayakheda. According to Mr. Deshpande, the petitioner be granted furlough by imposing condition that he will not enter Belkhedea during the period of furlough and by imposing appropriate conditions. 7. Mrs. Joshi, learned A.P.P. for the respondents supported the impugned order. 8. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the respondents and having perused the record we are of the considered opinion that this is a fit case in which the petitioner deserves to be released on furlough for a period of two weeks. It is pertinent to note that on earlier six occasions the petitioner was released on furlough and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him. Moreover, the petitioner is going to reside at village Sayakheda, in the event, of his release on 4 furlough which is at the distance of 15 KM from the village Belkheda where the relatives of the deceased reside. Therefore, by putting appropriate conditions, the petitioner deserves to be released on furlough. 9. For the reasons aforesaid the order impugned dated 8.9.2008 is quashed and set aside. The respondent no.1 is directed to release the petitioner on furlough for a period of two weeks subject to compliance of the Rules and further subject to condition that the petitioner shall not enter the village Belkheda during the period of furlough leave and shall report at the Police Station Shirajgaon (Kasba) every alternate day from the date of release between 10 to 11 a.m.. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. JUDGE JUDGE patle