Dismissed

Salim Rahim Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC28 Jun 2016WP/3807/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge full bench quashed a criminal writ petition filed by a prisoner against the rejection of his application for further extension of furlough. The Court held that Rule 13 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, prohibits a second extension of furlough in the same calendar year. Consequently, the Court found no perversity in the authorities' decision and dismissed th

What did the court decide?

The writ petition bearing no substance was rejected, and the rule was discharged.

Salim Rahim Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

cri wp 3807-15.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3807 OF 2015

Salim Rahim Shaikh

.. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

.. Respondent

¶10

Appearances

¶11

Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner Mrs. A.S. Pai APP for the State

¶12

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &

¶13

MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

¶14

DATE : JUNE 28, 2016.

¶15

ORAL ORDER [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

¶16

Heard both sides.

¶17

Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶18

3. The petitioner preferred an application for furlough

¶19

which came to be granted. Pursuant to the said order granting furlough, the petitioner was released on furlough on

¶20

15.7.2015. The petitioner thereafter preferred an application

¶21

for extension of furlough on the ground that his aunt was

¶22

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 4

¶23

cri wp 3807-15.doc

¶24

sick. The said application for extension of furlough came to be rejected by order dated 3.8.2015. The reason for rejecting the application of the petitioner for extension of furlough was that earlier the petitioner was released on furlough on 07.01.15 for a period of two weeks. Thereafter, he preferred an application for extension of furlough for another two weeks. The said application came to be granted.

¶25

In view of Rule 13 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, a second extension of furlough cannot

¶26

be granted in the same year. Rule 13 reads as under:-

¶27

" 13. Extension of the period of furlough - Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing rules, the Sanctioning Authority may, on the application of a prisoner or otherwise, by an order in writing extend the period of furlough, the sanctioning authority may determine the extension of furlough leave shall be granted for only 14 days only once in a calender year and no further extension shall be granted to prisoner."

¶28

We may also refer to a Notification dated 2.12.2003 which reflects that the convict can be granted only one extension for furlough leave in a year and no further extension can be granted to a convict.

¶29

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 4

¶30

cri wp 3807-15.doc

¶31

Hence, considering the aforesaid Rule 13 of The Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 and the Notification dated 2.12.2013 cumulatively, we are of the view

¶32

that as the petitioner was already granted extension of furlough of 14 days when he was released on furlough earlier, the authority could not have granted another extension of furlough in the same calender year.

¶33

In view of the above, we are of the considered view that the authority has passed the order rightly and we do not find any perversity therein.

¶34

In the circumstances, the present petition bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and same deserves to be rejected and same stands rejected accordingly. Rule stands discharged in the above terms.

¶35

jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 4

¶36

cri wp 3807-15.doc

¶37

Office to communicate this order to the petitioner who

¶38

is lodged in Nasik Road Central Prison.

¶39

[ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]

¶40

jfoanz vkacsjdj

¶41

4 of 4

Salim Rahim Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim Rahim Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satish Raghunath Devkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Satish Raghunath Devkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pradumna Balgonda Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sameer Gulam Hussain Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Ramchandra Haldankar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gajanan Khandu Tiwade Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.