1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1079 OF 2009 Shri Achyut Madhavrao Dhore ...Petitioner VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Miss. Shilpa Awachar, advocate appointed for the petitioner Shri K.J.Ghute Patil, APP for the respondent ..... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, JJ. DATED : 05.01.2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Shrihari P.Davare, J.) 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and by the consent of the learned counsel for the parties taken up for final hearing. 2 The petitioner/convict preferred an application on 2.11.2009, which was treated as Criminal Writ Petition. 2 The petitioner preferred present petition requesting to quash and set aside the order dated 26.10.2009, passed by the Special Inspector General of Prison, Central Division, Aurangabad, rejecting the application of the petitioner for furlough leave. According to the petitioner, he applied for the furlough leave on 16.6.2009, which was forwarded to the Superintendent of Central Prison, Aurangabad and to the Deputy Inspector General (Prisons), Aurangabad on 23.7.2009. Accordingly, police report was called, which apparently was adverse to the petitioner herein, and consequently, the Special Inspector General of Prison, Central Division, Aurangabad rejected the application of the petitioner for furlough leave. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order, the petitioner/convict has preferred application dated 2.11.2009 before this court. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the petitioner/convict was on bail during the pendency of the trial and the grounds posed in the police report that if the petitioner/convict is released on furlough leave, there is possibility of threatening to the witnesses and the complainant by the petitioner/convict herein, bears no substance, since when the petitioner was on bail during the pendency of the trial there was no occasion of such 3 threats/influence upon the witnesses at the hands of the petitioner herein. Learned counsel for the petitioner/convict further canvassed that the petitioner has sought the furlough leave for the first time and in fact , it is the right of the petitioner to avail the furlough leave to enable the petitioner/convict to meet his relatives. 4 To counter the petition and submissions of the petitioner/convict, the respondent has filed affidavit in reply through Bharat Mahadeo Bhosale, working as Additional Superintendent of Prison, Central Jail, Aurangabad and stated that the petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 14 of 2005 and was sentenced to life imprisonment by judgment and order rendered on 11.5.2007, and accordingly, the petitioner is undergoing life imprisonment in Central Prison at Aurangabad. It is also stated in the affidavit in reply that the petitioner/convict applied for furlough leave on 16.6.2009 and accordingly police report was called in that respect, which was adverse to the petitioner and the said report revealed that there would be danger to the life of the complainant and the witnesses if the petitioner is 4 released on furlough leave. The said affidavit in reply also reveals that nobody from the family of the petitioner is suffering from any ailment and there is no reason for the petitioner to go on furlough leave. Pursuant to the said police report, which was adverse to the petitioner herein, ther Special Inspector General of Prison, Central Division, Aurangabad rejected the application of the petitioner in view of Rule 4 (4) of the Maharashtra Prison (Mumbai Furlough and Parol), Rules, 1959 and it is submitted that the said order has been passed rightly, and no interference therein is warranted. 5 We have perused the contents of the application dated 2.11.2009 preferred by the petitioner/convict through jail and it’s annexures. We have also perused the police report dated 11.2.2009 at page no. 6 and we have also heard the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties anxiously. The police report dated 11.9.2009 reveals that there would be danger to the complainant and the witnesses if the petitioner is released on furlough leave. However, in the said context, it is material to note that the contents of the application dated 2.11.2009, wherein the petitioner has specifically stated that the complainant has already expired almost about 3 5 years back. In the light of the said statement made by the petitioner in his application, there is no substance in the apprehension posed by the respondent regarding danger to the complainant if the petitioner is released on furlough leave. Moreover, it is important to note that the petitioner/convict was on bail during the pendency of the trial and there are no allegations against the petitioner/convict that he misused the liberty while he was on bail during the pendency of the trial. Hence, considering the position, it is apparent that the apprehension posed in the police report dated 11.9.2009 bears no substance and has not been supported by the objective material. 6 Besides that, the petitioner has applied for furlough leave for the first time, since he was convicted by judgment and order dated 11.5.2007, and in fact, he is entitled to be released on furlough leave on his undergoing the sentence for the period of two years. 7 Hence, having the comprehensive view of the matter, the present petition succeeds and the impugned order dated 26.10.2009 passed by the Special Inspector General of Prison, Central Division, Aurangabad stands 6 quashed and set aside and the application preferred by the petitioner for furlough leave is allowed and the petitioner be released on furlough leave by the concerned authorities on the terms and conditions prescribed by them as per the Rules and Regulations. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms. 8 The fees of the learned counsel appointed for the petitioner in the present petition is quantified at Rs. 2,000/-, which be paid to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) dbm/crwp1079.09