A criminal convict challenged the forfeiture of a surety bond for furlough due to late surrender. The High Court declined to issue notice, held that the petitioner lacked locus standi as the bond was validly forfeited, and found no illegality in the authority's action.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.95/2013
Gajanan Kalipuri
...Versus...
The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati and another
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's ordersMrs. K.S. Joshi, APP for State/respondents.
CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE AND
A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ.
DATE : 4.03.2013
Heard Mrs. Joshi, the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for State/respondents.
This petition has been filed by the
petitioner, who is undergoing sentence of
imprisonment for life for having committed offence
punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code.
We do not deem it necessary either to issue notice
or to appoint an advocate on behalf of the
2
petitioner since the petition can be disposed of in
view of the facts stated in the petition itself.
The petitioner was granted furlough by the competent
authority. His sister Mrs. Mangla Dilip Puri stood
surety for him by executing bail bond in the sum of
Rs.2,000/-(Rs. Two Thousand Only) since the furlough
petitioner did not surrender in time and surrendered
late, the amount of Rs.2,000/- has been forfeited by
the competent authority. Being aggrieved by the
action of competent authority the petitioner has
filed the present petition.
Having heard the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor and having perused the record, we are of
the considered opinion that the petitioner has no
locus to file the present petition inasmuch as the
amount of Rs.2,000/- offered by way of surety by
Mrs. Mangla Puri has been forfeited. Secondly, we
do not find any illegality in the action of
competent authority in forfeiting the amount of
Rs.2,000/- on the ground of late surrender by the
petitioner. On both these grounds no interference is
warranted in the order impugned.
3
Copy of this order be sent to the
petitioner in Central Jail, Amravati.
Writ petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
JUDGEJUDGE
Tambaskar.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a criminal convict admitted as sureties forfeited the bond due to late surrender, obtains locus standi to approach the High Court under Article 226
Whether the competent authority committed any illegality in forfeiting the surety amount when the furlough applicant surrendered late
Gajanan Kalipuri
The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati
A.P. Lavande
A.B. Chaudhari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court