AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2970 OF 2009 Chandsingh Ajitsingh Kalyanji ... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. Shekhar S. Bhise for the petitioner. Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM: MRS. RANJANA DESAI & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : 25TH FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C.:- 1. The petitioner has preferred this petition through jail. The petitioner is a life convict. He is lodged in Yerwada Central Prison. The petitioner was released on furlough leave on 1/2/2006. He was to surrender to the prison on 16/2/2006. He, however, surrendered to the prison on 2/3/2006. Thus, he surrendered to the prison late by 14 days. For the late surrender, his cash surety amount of Rs.5,000/- has been forfeited and his remission is cut by 70 days. He is aggrieved by this action and hence, this AJN 2 petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had made an application for extension of furlough on 14/2/2006. He submitted that the application for extension of furlough leave was made on the ground that his brother was ill and he was supposed to undergo surgery. Learned counsel pointed out that the petitioner's application was wrongly rejected on the ground that the petitioner's brother does not fall within the definition of the term “family”. He pointed out that as per Rule 19 of the Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 (for short, “the said Rules”), a prisoner may be released on parole for such period not exceeding thirty days at a time in cases of serious illness or death of nearest relatives such as mother, father, sister, brother, children and spouse of the prisoner. This indicates that the brother's illness can be taken into consideration while granting parole. Learned counsel submitted that brother's illness can be taken into consideration while dealing with AJN 3 applications for extension of furlough leave also. We find substance in this contention. If brother's illness can be taken into consideration for grant of parole, we see no reason why it cannot be taken into consideration while considering extension of furlough application. Brother would, indeed, be a near relative. We, however, do not want to express any final opinion on this. In an appropriate case, this point can be considered. 3. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be right on this aspect, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, considering the fact that the petitioner has surrendered late by 14 days, we are not inclined to grant the prayer made by the petitioner in this petition. Hence, no interference is called for. The petition is dismissed. 4. This order be communicated to the prisoner in jail. [MRS. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.]