Disposed¶20

Rajendra S/O Dharmraj Giradkar v. the State of Maharashtra through Deputy Inspector General Prison Nagpur and Another

Bombay HC18 Feb 2025WP/645/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delayed surrender post parole/furlough; overstaying punishment 1:5 reduced to 1:3; proportionate punishment under Prisons Rules; Gajanan Eknath Murle seven conditions applied; ailing mother Hepatitis-C sole caregiver; voluntary surrender, no offence registered; no prison misconduct; DIG Prisons disciplinary order confirmed by District Judge; Criminal Writ Petition Nagpur Bench 2025.

What did the court decide?

Punishment for delayed surrender post parole/furlough reduced from 1:5 to 1:3; petition disposed of accordingly. ¶20

Rajendra S/O Dharmraj Giradkar vs the State of Maharashtra through Deputy Inspector General Prison Nagpur and Another — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Punishment for delayed surrender post parole/furlough reduced from 1:5 to 1:3; petition disposed of accordingly.

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the punishment of 1:5 imposed on the petitioner for delayed surrender post parole/furlough (confirmed by the learned District Judge on 6th June, 2024) should stand, or whether it was disproportionate and warranted reduction. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

Having regard to all seven conditions enumerated in the judgment of Gajanan Eknath Murle (supra), and in the absence of any offences committed in prison, given the petitioner's otherwise satisfactory conduct in jail and the period of imprisonment already undergone, the court deemed it appropriate to reduce the punishment from 1:5 to 1:3.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The respondent failed to place on record material demonstrating that family members other than the petitioner were in a position to take care of the petitioner's ailing mother, and therefore did not discharge its burden on that point pursuant to the earlier remand order.

¶15

Key takeaways

The medical papers placed on record establish that the petitioner's mother is under medical treatment for the ailment of Hepatitis-C.ratio¶16
Apart from the overstay episodes, there are no other complaints against the petitioner regarding his conduct in jail.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench (Sambre & Joshi, JJ.), Criminal Writ Petition No. 645 of 2024, decided 18.02.2025: Punishment of 1:5 (five days' additional imprisonment per day of overstay) imposed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons for delayed surrender after parole/furlough and confirmed by the District Judge on 06.06.2024 was reduced to 1:3. The petitioner had surrendered late on four occasions (by 15, 19, 54 and 4 days), claiming his ailing mother (Hepatitis-C patient) had no other caregiver; he surrendered voluntarily each time with no offence registered, had no prison offences and satisfactory conduct. The respondent failed to discharge its burden (per the Court's earlier remand order) of showing any other family member capable of caring for the mother, and the medical papers confirmed her treatment. Applying all seven conditions laid down in Gajanan Eknath Murle Vs. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Writ Petition No.993/2016, DB) and noting the imprisonment period already undergone, the Court found the 1:5 punishment disproportionate and disposed of the petition by reducing the punishment to 1:3.

¶1

913-cwp645.24.odt 1/3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

¶3

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.645 OF 2024

¶4

(Rajendra s/o. Dharmaraj Giradkar Vs. State of Maharashtra, through Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Eastern Region, Nagpur and another)

¶5

Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,__________________________________________________________________________ appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶6

Ms. Shweta P. Chavhan, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. I.J. Damle, APP for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶7

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2025.

¶8

Heard.

¶9

The challenge in the petition is to the order dated 6^th June, 2024 passed by the learned District Judge thereby confirming the order passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons imposing punishment of 1:5 for delayed surrender post parole/furlough.

¶10

The case of the petitioner is that on four occasions petitioner surrendered late by 15, 19, 54 and 4 days and as such punishment of 1:5 is awarded for overstaying as for a single day the petitioner has to undergo five days of additional imprisonment.

¶11

The counsel for the petitioner has sought to demonstrate from the record that his ailing mother is suffering from Hepatitis-C and in the family there is nobody to take care of her including that of making her attend the health facilities. It is claimed that on all these four occasions offence is not registered as the petitioner has surrendered voluntarily and in the light of

¶12

913-cwp645.24.odt 2/3

¶13

the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Gajanan Eknath Murle Vs. State of Maharashtra, (Criminal Writ Petition No.993/2016), the petitioner should have been awarded proportionate and not dis-proportionate punishment. It is sought to be demonstrated that all the five conditions in the matter of Gajanan Eknath Murle (supra) are duly established.

¶14

As against above, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would urge that the petitioner has formed a habit of overstaying on each occasion and there is no genuine justification for such overstay. The punishment awarded is in proportion to his overstay as is prescribed by the State Government under the Prisons Rules and that being so, the petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶15

The fact remains that from the record, the petitioner is able to demonstrate that his mother is suffering from hepatitis and is under the treatment of a doctor. The respondent pursuant to the order of remand passed by this Court ought to have placed on record the material to demonstrate that other than petitioner, there are family members, who are in a position to take care of ailing mother of the petitioner however the respondent has failed to do so and as such the burden to that extent is not discharged.

¶16

The medical papers placed on record justifies that the mother of the petitioner is under medical treatment for the ailment of Hepatitis-C.

¶17

Apart from above, there are no other complaints against the petitioner viz. his conduct in the jail.

¶18

Having regard to all seven conditions which are enumerated in the judgment of Gajanan Eknath Murle (supra),

¶19

913-cwp645.24.odt 3/3

¶20

we are of the view that in absence of there being any offences committed in Prison and his otherwise satisfactory conduct in the jail so also the period for which he has already undergone imprisonment, we deem it appropriate to reduce the punishment to 1:3. The petition, as such, stands disposed of in above terms.

¶21

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

¶22

Wadode

¶23

Signed by: Mr. Devendra Wadode Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 20/02/2025 10:34:35

Rajendra S/O Dharmraj Giradkar v. the State of Maharashtra through Deputy Inspector General Prison Nagpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra S/O Dharmraj Giradkar v. the State of Maharashtra through Deputy Inspector General Prison Nagpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sheikh Shahrukh Sheikh Mehboob vs the State of Mah. Thr. Home Depatment (Spl) 2ND Follr, Main Building, Mantralaya, Mumbai and 3

Sumit Brijbihari Giri vs Police Inspector General Prisons ( East Region) Nagpur

Gagan Radhekant Mishra ( at Open Prison) Vs the Superintendent Open Prison Nagpur

Ku. Priyanka Shyamsundar Kolhe @ Priyanka Vishal Ghodmare Vs the S. T. Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Chandrapur, Thr. Its Member Secretary

Rajnish Gyaniram Ramteke Vs State of Maha., Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Education and Research, Mumbai and Anr.

Prakash Harichand Mothghare vs the Directrict Magistrate Bhandara, Office the Dist. Collector and Dist. Magi. at Bhandara and 2