1 Cri. W.P.No. 235 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Criminal Writ Petition No.235 Of 2011 * Shaikh Akhil Shaikh Gulam Yesdani, Prisoner, (Convict No.6737) Central Jail, Harsool, Aurangabad. .. Petitioner. Versus 1) The Regional Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad. 2) The Superintendent of Prison, Central Jail, Aurangabad. 3) The Commissioner of Police Aurangabad. 4) The State of Maharashtra. ...Respondents. -------- Smt. Manjusha Deshpande Advocate appointed for petitioner. Shri. K.G. Patil, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent Nos.1 to 4. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL & T.V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATE: 15th APRIL 2011 2 Cri. W.P.No. 235 of 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Naresh H Patil, J.) 1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2) The petitioner, a prisoner, applied for furlough on 10th May 2010 to the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Aurangabad. A report was called in this regard. It is submitted that the office of the Commissioner of Police Aurangabad forwarded papers to City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad, which was received on 30-5-2010. A reminder was received by the City Chowk Police Station on 8th February 2011 sent from the office of the Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad. 3) As the petitioner's application for furlough was not decided for several months the petitioner addressed a communication to this Court which was treated as writ petition. Respondent No.3 filed affidavit-in-reply through Mr. Khushalchand Govindlal Baheti, Police Inspector, City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad. The deponent stated in para 3 as under : 3 Cri. W.P.No. 235 of 2011 "3. By way of this petition, the petitioner convict No. 6737 who is presently lodged at the Central Prison, Aurangabad seeks directions from this Hon'ble Court for his release on furlough leave. It is the contention of petitioner that, he has been convicted for the offence committed u/sec.376 of IPC and has been sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. Further it is his contention that, he had applied for furlough leave on 10.5.2010 to the D.I.G. Prisons, Aurangabad through proper channel. It is his case that, in spite of reminders sent to the office of the Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad, the police authorities have not submitted the police papers i.e. necessary for the competent authority to decide his application for furlough leave. In this respect, it is submitted that, upon verification of the records at the City Chowk Police Station, it is evident from the Inward Register that, the petitioner's application for inquiry and submission of police report was forwarded to the City Chowk Police Station on 30.5.2010. However, the copy of the said letter is not found on the record of the police station. Further reminder dt. 8.2.2011 was also received from the office of the Police Commissioner, Aurangabad in this regard. However, the concerned Police Head Constable dealing with the Inward Section at the police station namely Shir. K.L. Bundile (B.No.2395) had not placed the same before the Head Constable Shri. Khandagale (B.No.1366) who was directed by this deponent to inquire into the matter and submit the necessary police report. I say that, it is only upon receipt of the notice from the office of the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Aurangabad, that, the matter was inquired into by the present deponent and it was found that, the police report was not sent due to the negligence on the part of Police Head Constable Shri. K.L. Bundile who had kept th matter pending with him. I say that, the necessary disciplinary action has been proposed against Shri. K.L. Bundile and pending a departmental inquiry against him he has been put under suspension by order dt.11.4.2011. ..... " 4) We may refer to a Circular issued by the State Government dated 21st March 2001 which specifies time limit to be observed by the authorities concerned in respect of processing the application filed by prisoner for 4 Cri. W.P.No. 235 of 2011 furlough or parole. 5) It is clear from the documents placed on record that the police report was not forwarded to the authorities concerned within stipulated time frame as prescribed by the State Government. 6) The respondent No.3 in the reply submitted that the Head Constable dealing with the application was responsible in keeping the matter pending with him. A departmental action has been proposed and pending inquiry he has been put under suspension by an order dated 11th April 2011. 7) Time and again this Court has observed and indicated that the concerned authorities and the police authorities shall strictly adhere to the orders / circulars issued by the State Government in this regard. We observe that the authorities concerned shall make use of the technology in forwarding the papers/reports to the concerned authorities so that time schedule prescribed is strictly adhered to and the record of the same is maintained. 5 Cri. W.P.No. 235 of 2011 8) Considering the importance of the issue we direct the Commissioner of Police Aurangabad to look into different aspects of the issue and ensure prompt steps in this regard. The Commissioner shall issue appropriate directions to fix responsibility for the lapses. In case a departmental inquiry is necessary against the person responsible it be initiated and completed at the earliest. 9) In the light of the fact that the police report is now submitted to the D.I.G. (Prisons), we direct the D.I.G. (Prisons) to pass appropriate orders on the application of the petitioner in accordance with law at the earliest. 10) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. 11) Authenticated copy be given to the Additional Public Prosecutor. The Registry to forward a copy of this order to the Commissioner of Police Aurangabad 12) The High Court Legal Services Sub Committee is directed to pay the fees to the Advocate appointed for the petitioner. Sd/- Sd/- (T.V. NALAWADE, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.) rsl