Central Prison, Aurangabad. The act of respondent was contrary to the rules prescribed for transfer of prisoners from Open prison to Close Prison. He drawn attention towards the Rules 3, 4 and 6 of the Rules of 1971 and submitted that prior to approval from the Inspector General of Prisons, the petitioners were transferred to Central Prison, Aurangabad. He assailed that there was violation of Rule 6 of the Rules of 1971. Therefore, entire action initiated by the respondent- Jail authority was illegal and required to be quashed and set-aside. According to learned counsel, the petitioners did not commit any prison-offences as defined under the Chapter XI of the Prison Act, 1894. But, the false and baseless accusations were made against them. There were no prohibitory articles recovered from the petitioners. The learned counsel Shri. Jaiswal, in support of his arguments, relied upon the legal ratio laid down by this Court, in the cases of - Ravi alias Ravindra Umaji Gunjkar Versus State of Maharashtra and others, reported in, 2011 ALL MR (Cri) 1904 Dhananjay s/o. Namdeo Kharade Versus State of Maharashtra and others, reported in, 2019 ALL MR (Cri) 2381 , Sadashiv Seena Salian Versus State of Maharashtra reported in 2002 (Supp.) Bom. C.R. (Cri.) 923, and, Gajanan Mohanlal Sikchi Versus State of Maharashtra and another Versus State of Maharashtra, reported in (1993) 1 BCR 147 : (1992) 94 Bom LR 254.
