07. So far as the ground, that the appeal preferred by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court, is concerned, same is not tenable. As rightly submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, filing of an appeal against conviction and sentence is right of a convict. It has no nexus with grant or rejection of furlough leave. So also, ratio of the judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Rubina Suleman Memon (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In the said case, the convict was undergoing sentence for conviction under the provisions of Terrorist and Destructive Activities Act, 1987, and rigors of the notification dated 23.02.2012, more particularly, Sub-Rule 13 of Rule 4 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, were fully applicable to the petitioner therein. Such is not the case of the present petitioner. The petitioner is not suffering punishment for any act under the provisions of TADA. The last ground, that there is no recommendation of Jail Superintendent, is also not tenable. The leave sanctioning authority can suo motu call for recommendation or otherwise from the Jail Superintendent.
