JUDGMENT Z. A. HAQ, J. :- Heard. 2. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court making a grievance against the order passed by the respondent rejecting his application for grant of furlough. 4. The respondent has rejected the application of the petitioner and has refused to grant furlough in view of the provisions of Rule 4(10) of the Prisons (Bombay Parole and Furlough) Rules, 1959. According to the respondent, the petitioner was released on furlough and parole on the earlier occasions and at that time he had not surrendered on the scheduled dates and had surrendered late by 54 days. 50 days and 90 days. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court the respondent has filed reply and has stated in the reply that the application of the petitioner for grant of furlough is rejected under the provisions of Rule 4(6) & (10) of the Prisons (Bombay Parole and Furlough) Rules, 1959. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents/ State and have examined the record. 6. It is the fact that when the petitioner was released on parole and furlough on earlier occasions, he had surrendered late but it is undisputed that the petitioner has surrendered by himself without being required to be arrested by police. In our view, in the facts of the case, the petitioner is entitled for grant of furlough as prayed for by him. The respondents have not brought anything on record to show that petitioner has misbehaved or indulged in any objectionable activity when he was released earlier on parole and furlough. Therefore, we pass the following order. ORDER The impugned order is quashed. The respondents are directed to release the petitioner on furlough for the period of two weeks from today on furnishing two sureties. Rule is made absolute accordingly. In the circumstances the parties to bear their own costs. Petition allowed.