Vijay Ramchandra Nehare v. State of Maharashtra, through
2008-02-22
A.B.CHAUDHARI, A.P.LAVANDE
body2008
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT (PER : A.P. LAVANDE, J.) 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the respondents. 2. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 3. By this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging order dated 25.10.2007, passed by the competent authority, rejecting application for furlough, filed by the petitioner on the ground that the statements of respectable persons from the locality as well as Sarpanch, Police Patil and witnesses in Sessions Trial in which accused was tried disclose likelihood of breach of peace. The competent authority has passed order relying upon Rule 4 (4) of the Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959. 4. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 304 (I) and 324 of Indian Penal Code. The father of the petitioner is ready and willing to stand surety for the petitioner. The apprehension expressed by the competent authority on the basis of statements of several witnesses that there is likelihood of breach of peace can be taken care of by imposing appropriate conditions. Having considered the reports of the Collector and Additional Superintendent of Police (Rural), Nagpur, we are of the opinion that this is a fit case in which the petitioner deserves to be released on furlough for a period of 14 days by imposing stringent conditions. Accordingly, impugned order dated 25.10.2007, passed by the competent authority is quashed and set aside and the competent authority is directed to grant furlough to the petitioner for a period of 14 days, subject to compliance of The Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 and subject to condition that during the period of furlough the petitioner shall report at Narkhed Police Station daily between 4:00 to 5:00 p.m.. In case the petitioner fails to report at police station as directed, the police are at liberty to take the petitioner in custody and take him back to prison. 5. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. 6. Fees payable to Advocate Ms S.R. Gaikee, who has been appointed under the Legal Aid Scheme, are quantified at Rs.750/- only.