1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No.151/2008 [Shrideo Trimbak Wankhede .vrs. State of Maharashtra] ............................................................................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. Manoj Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. J.B. Jaiswal, APP for the respondents. .......... CORAM : K.J. ROHEE AND B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, JJ DATED : JUNE 10, 2008 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the respondents/State. 2. The petitioner, who is a life convict, has challenged the order dated 31.12.2007 rejecting his application for furlough. 3. A perusal of the said order shows that the petitioner is in the habit of absconding whenever he was released in the past either on furlough or on parole. So also the proposed surety is not ready to stand as surety to the 2 petitioner. Hence, the application was rejected under rule 4(6)(10) and Rule 6 of the Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959. 4. A perusal of the affidavit filed by Shri Kanhekar, Jailor Grade – 2, Amravati Central Prison, shows that in 2000 the petitioner was released on parole but he did not surrender on time and was arrested after 251 days. In 2003, the petitioner was released on parole but did not surrender on time and he was arrested after 74 days. In 2006, the petitioner was released on furlough but he did not surrender on time and he was arrested after 98 days. No doubt, every time he was punished for absconding. However, this disentitled the petitioner to seek furlough leave and the competent authority was justified in rejecting the application of the petitioner under rule 4(6)(10) and Rule 6 of the Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959. Thus, we do not find any merit in the petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Gulande