Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1267 (BOM)

Nazir Pathyekhanvar v. Inspector General Of Prisons

2019-05-17

M.S.SONAK

body2019
JUDGMENT M. S. Sonak, J. - Heard Mr. T. George John, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Pravin Faldessai, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent and at the request of the learned Counsel for the parties as also taking into consideration the limited issue involved. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service on behalf of the State. 3. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 04/04/2019 by which the petitioner''s application for furlough has been rejected by the Inspector General of Prisons. 4. The impugned order is basically based upon the adverse Police report. The report, does not appear to be backed by any serious material in support of the apprehensions expressed therein. The report also overlooks the fact that the petitioner had been released on parole on two occasions and on furlough on one occasion. There is nothing on record to indicate that the petitioner had breached the terms and conditions subject to which he was released on parole or furlough. 5. The petitioner''s brother has offered to furnish surety to the petitioner. The impugned order itself records that the family members of the petitioner are ready to permit the petitioner to stay along with them if released on furlough. 6. On cumulative consideration of all the aforesaid circumstances and other material on record, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The petitioner is directed to be released on furlough on the usual terms and conditions. Formal orders in this regard may be made on or before 30/05/2019. 7. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no orders as to costs. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.