Petitioner challenged punishment for over-staying furlough, arguing the order was a non-accepted cyclostyled copy lacking reasoned findings. Court set aside the order for non-application of mind.
Impugned order set aside; matter remanded to authority for fresh decision within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
PPD
1
11.wp.321-11
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.321 OF 2011
Shri Liladhar Dattaram Nagvekar. Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and others.
..Petitioner.
..Respondents.
Mr.Madhav Jamdar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.P.A. Pol, Public Prosecutor for the State.
CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 25th FEBRUARY, 2011.
P.C.
2
11.wp.321-11
cyclostyled copy which itself reveals non-application of mind by the Authority with regard to explanation offered by the Petitioner for over-staying furlough period. Secondly, the Authority has not analyzed the explanation offered by the Petitioner and found as of fact that the same is incorrect or otherwise and further that it is not a sufficient cause.
3
11.wp.321-11
can be accepted as sufficient cause or otherwise. That is imperative in view of the language of Rule 2 of the statutory Rules framed under the Prisons Act. Inasmuch as, the expression used in the said Rules is : " .... Superintendent at his discretion with due regard to the circumstances of the case ..... ". Again in the later part, it is observed that “ If the Superintendent is satisfied that the contravention was for good or sufficient reasons, he may excuse the prisoner ."
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order suffers from non-application of mind due to being a cyclostyled copy with unstruckthrough clauses.
Whether the Authority failed to record a finding on the correctness and sufficiency of the Petitioner's explanation for over-staying the furlough period.
Whether the impugned order should be set aside and remanded for reconsideration on merits.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri Liladhar Dattaram Nagvekar
The State of Maharashtra
A.M. Khanwilkar
A.R. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
