1 12 appw.204.10 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 204 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 644 OF 2010 Khalid Abdul Razzak Kazi and anr. ... Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent ----- Mrs. Indrayani Koparkar, advocate appointed for the Petitioners. Ms. S.V.Gajare. APP for the Respondent/ State. ----- CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR and P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : 27 th September, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 The Petitioners were ordered to be taken to Mahim with a police escort in plain clothes, so as to enable them to attend marriage of their sister on 5 th March, 2010, vide order dated 26 th February, 2010 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 644 of 2010. Further order came to be passed on 2 nd March, 2010. Later on, the Petitioners were handed over to the Escort Authority on 04 th March, 2010 at 14:35 hrs. However, the Escort Authority returned back to jail alongwith the Petitioners at 23:30 hrs on the same day. When the Petitioners were being taken away by the 2 12 appw.204.10 Escort Authority, they attempted to run away from the custody of the Police Escort Team. That police case has been registered against the Petitioners. That was the justification given by the Escort Authority for bringing back the Petitioners to jail instead of being taken to Mahim to attend the marriage of their sister. This aspect has been examined on 5 th March, 2010 and the Court deprecated the conduct of the Petitioners. It also revoked the order dated 3 rd March, 2010. Further, the Court observed that the Prison Authority are free to adopt appropriate proceedings against the Petitioners. Insofar as the amount deposited by the father of the Petitioners towards transport expenses is concerned, the Court clarified that the Authorities may deduct the expenses and refund the remaining amount, if any. 3 The grievance of the Petitioners before us is that in spite of such directions, the amount has not been returned to the Petitioners so far. From the order dated 5 th March, 2010, which has been allowed to become final, it is obvious that Authority is entitled to deduct the expenses and only to refund the balance amount to the Petitioners. If the amount has not been refunded to the Petitioners, we direct the concerned Authority to do the needful and comply with the order dated 5 th March, 2010 as expeditiously as possible and in any case not later than two weeks from the receipt of this order. Petition disposed of on the above terms. 3 12 appw.204.10 4 Court expresses word of gratitude for the able assistance given by the advocate appointed to espouse the cause of the Petitioners. 5 Copy of this order be forwarded to the Petitioners who is in jail, forthwith. [ P.D. KODE, J ] [ A.M. KHANWILKAR, J ]