1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.: 497 OF 2010 *** Satyadev Madhavrao Jamgade Versus The State of Maharashtra *** 1. We have heard learned counsel Mr. S.S.Pawar (appointed) for the Petitioner and learned A.P.P. Mr. Jadhav for the Respondent. 2. Rule, made returnable forthwith, heard finally by consent of the parties. 3. Petitioner seeks following reliefs, in this writ petition. "A) This writ petition may kindly be allowed. B) By passing the necessary order or direction in the nature of appropriate writ the Respondent NO.2 and 3 be directed to grant the 7 days furlough for the period of 16.3.2010 to 22.3.2010 which was unauthorised absence from the jail. C) That the order dated 22.3.2010 passed by the Special Inspector General of Police / The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons Central Jail Aurangabad in respect of furlough of the petitioner may kindly 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. be quashed and set aside; which is marked as (Exh.C) with the writ petition." The petitioner's main prayer thus is prayer clause (B) and ancillary prayer is prayer clause (C). 4. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner points out pleadings, raised in para 6 of the petition. It has been pleaded that the Petitioner was released on furlough leave with effect from 22nd February, 2010 till 8th of March, 2010. Petitioner requested for extension of furlough leave already granted. This request was considered by the Respondents favourably and extension from 9th March, 2010 till 15th March, 2010 (7 days) was granted. The petitioner was supposed to report to the prison authorities on 16th March, 2010. However, he did not report on that day. Ultimately, petitioner/ prisoner reported to the jail authorities on 23rd March, 2010, that is how the petitioner prays in this writ petition to treat his absence 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. for the period from 16th March, 2010 till 22nd March, 2010 as extended furlough period. 5. On behalf of Respondents, affidavit in reply is filed. In para 3 it has been stated that petitioner has sought for extension of furlough leave for the period 16th March, 2010 till 22nd March, 2010. Petitioner was released on furlough leave for the period of 14 days. Said period was from 22nd February, 2010 till 9th March, 2010. The petitioner was required to resume his incarceration on or before 9th March, 2010. However, petitioner requested for extension of furlough leave on the ground of illness of his wife. Respondents have considered his plea and extension of furlough leave was granted for the period of 7 days alone with effect from 2nd March, 2010. Copy of the said order is Annexure R/1. It appears that said order was passed by the authority on 2nd March, 2010. In this order, it has been 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. specifically mentioned that the application made by the petitioner for extension of furlough leave, which was granted by the authority from 9th March, 2010 till 15th March, 2010 for the period of one week. This grant was on same terms and conditions of earlier grant of furlough leave on 7th February, 2010. According to the Respondents, petitioner was supposed to resume with prison authorities on or before 16th March, 2010, however, on 15th March, 2010 he again applied for further extension for the period of 7 days on the ground of illness of his wife. Said application was received by the Respondents on 18th March, 2010. In para 5, amendment to Rule 13 has been referred to. It is further averred in para 5 that though the application was received by the authority for further extension, such extension in furloug leave can be permitted once only. In the case on 5 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. hand, it was extended for the period of 7 days, now, according to the Respondents, there is no provision in law for further extension of furlough leave. On this ground, plea of extension has been refused. 6. We have seen amended Rule 13. We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties. Petitioner is seeking judicial review of the order passed by the Respondents. Order passed by the Respondents fits in amended Rule No.13. Discretion, which is exercised by the authority, is squarely within the parameters of amended Rul3 13. One extension of 7 days was already granted, which is not disputed by the petitioner also. In our view, parameters of Rule 13 does not permit us to consider the prayer of the petitioner favourably and writ cannot be issued against the authorities for regularisation of unauthorised absence of the petitioner. In our view, petition sans merit 6 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. and deserves to be dismissed. 7. Writ petition stands dismissed. 8. We quantify Rs.2,000/- towards fees and expenses to learned counsel Mr. S.S.Pawar, appointed for the petitioner. [S. S. SHINDE, J.] [S.B.DESHMUKH, J.] Dated:20/07/2010. ans/497