IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 78 OF 2009 SHRI NARESH PARAB PRESENTLY SERVING SENTENCE AT CENTRAL JAIL AGUADA THR. BROTHER SHRI RAJESH PARAB ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY ... Respondent Mrs. Asha Dessai,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C. A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the respondent. Coram:- U. D. SALVI, J. Date:- 18th December, 2009 P.C. Heard. Perused application and annexures therewith. 2. Learned Advocate Asha Dessai fervently argued that the prisoner is now seeking reduction of the surety amount for his release on furlough and the fact that he could not avail of the order releasing him on furlough on the condition of furnishing a bond of Rs. 1 Lac is sufficient enough to show that he does not have means to furnish the bond for an excessive amount of Rs.1 Lac. She relied on the unreported orders of this Court; dated 17.02.2009 in W.P.CR.No.64/2008 - Deelip S. Shetye Versus State of Goa and two others and order dated 07/05/2009 in W.P.Cr. No.16/2009 Shailesh Gadekar Versus State and two others, in support of her submission. She further submitted that the State could not have by its policy decision in the meeting dated 26.3.2008 arrived at a straight jacket formula of releasing the convicts under NDPS Act and under Section 302 of I.P.C.,1860 on bond amount of Rs.1 Lac. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor Ferreira for the State submitted that policy decision was required to be taken by the State in view of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.Cr. No.5/2008 on 19/03/2008 taking serious note of the prisoners jumping on parole and inability of the police to nab them. Text of the minutes of the meeting dated 26.3.2008 in which the State had taken a policy decision has been placed before this Court. Learned Public Prosecutor Ferreira for the State, however, fairly submitted that there cannot be a straight jacket formula for every convict prisoner under NDPS Act and under Section 302 of I.P.C. as regards the surety amount. However, he submitted, it is for the aggrieved person to approach the authorities with his grievance that he is not in a position to furnish the surety bond and to seek enquiry in that regard for the purposes of convincing the authorities of his inability to furnish the bond as required by them. Unless this has been done, he submitted, there cannot lie a petition for writ of mandamus commanding the authorities to do something., which is not called for. 4. While considering such matters, the reality of the convict prisoners jumping on the parole/ furlough for the reason of inadequacy of the surety bond cannot be ignored. Balance needs to be struck between the right of the prisoner to avail of the order of furlough/ parole and the amount of surety bond prescribed therefor. This can effectively be done by conducting enquiry into the capacity of the prisoner to furnish surety bond at the hands of the concerned authorities. Hence, the order : (i)The petitioner Naresh Parab shall place before the Inspector General of Prisons, Panaji, Goa all such material showing his capacity to furnish the amount of surety bond and his incapacity to furnish surety bond of Rs. 1 Lac within a week of this order. (ii)The Inspector General of Prisons, Panaji, Goa shall consider all such material placed before him or summoned at the instance of the petitioner as well as all other relevant material brought on record and decide the amount of surety bond which the petitioner would be in a position to give within a period of three weeks thereafter. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. U. D. SALVI, J. SMA