Dismissed

Dhaval Narsinhbhai Darji Thro Narsinhbhai Dungarbhai Darji v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC8 Dec 2021SCR.A/11992/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat rejected an application for furlough leave filed by a convict charged with kidnapping and murder. The court upheld the competent authority's decision, ruling that furlough is not a right and noting specific statutory exclusions under the 1959 Rules.

What did the court decide?

Application for furlough leave rejected. Discharged.

Dhaval Narsinhbhai Darji Thro Narsinhbhai Dungarbhai… — Service and Employment | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

R/SCR.A/11992/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 11992 of 2021

¶4

================================================== DHAVAL NARSINHBHAI DARJI THRO NARSINHBHAI DUNGARBHAI DARJI

¶5

Versus

¶6

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

================================================== Appearance:

¶8

MR V B MALIK(5071) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

¶9

for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3

¶10

MR RONAK RAVAL, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶11

==================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA M. SAREEN

¶13

Date : 08/12/2021

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent – State.

¶16

The present application has been filed by the applicant challenging an order dated 03.11.2021 by the competent authority, rejecting his application for furlough leave mainly on the ground negative police opinion, he is convicted in the heinous offence and that complainant has apprehended that if the applicant is released, it will endanger the lives of the complainant and his family members.

¶17

Heard learned advocate for the applicant. He has submitted that in past also, applicant’s applications for

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

R/SCR.A/11992/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2021

¶20

furlough leave dated 15.11.2019 and 23.10.2020 had been rejected by the competent authority on the same ground. He has further submitted that applicant is having aged parents and he is residing at different address, then of the complainant and therefore, there is no possibility of any untoward incident and that applicant will be abide by any condition imposed by the Court.

¶21

Learned APP has submitted that applicant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 364(A), 302, 201 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code for kidnapping and murdering 17 years old boy and therefore, competent authority is right in rejecting the application for furlough.

¶22

Having considered the submissions made by learned APP coupled with the order of the competent authority, it clearly appears that Furlough has been rejected under Rule 4(4) and 6 of the Prisons (Mumbai Parole and Furlough) Rules, 1959. Now it is an admitted fact that furlough is not a right of the convict as per Rule 17 of the Prisons (Mumbai Parole and Furlough) Rules, 1959.

¶23

As per Rule 4, the following categories of prisoners shall not be considered for release on furlough:

¶24

(1) Habitual prisoners.

¶25

(2) Prisoners convicted of offences under Sections 392 to 402 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code.

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

R/SCR.A/11992/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2021

¶28

(3) Prisoners convicted of offence under the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949.

¶29

(4) Prisoners whose release is not recommended in Greater Bombay by the Commissioner of Police and elsewhere, by the District Magistrate on the ground of public peace and tranquility.

¶30

(5) Prisoners who, in the opinion of the Superintendent of the prison show a tendency towards crime.

¶31

(6) Prisoners whose conduct is in the opinion of the Superintendent of Prison, not satisfactory enough.

¶32

(7) Prisoners confined in the Ratnagiri Special Prison [other than prisoners transferred to that prison for jail services]

¶33

(8) Prisoners convicted of offences of violence against person or property committed for political motives, unless the prior consent of the State Government to such release is obtained.

¶34

(9) A prisoner or class of prisoners in whose case the State Government has directed that the prisoner shall not be released or that the case should be referred to it for orders.

¶35

(10) Prisoners who have at any time escaped or attempted to escape from lawful custody or have

¶36

Page 3 of 4

¶37

R/SCR.A/11992/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2021

¶38

defaulted in any way in surrendering themselves at the appropriate time after release on parole or furlough.

¶39

(11) Prisoners convicted of offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.

¶40

Considering the aforesaid provisions coupled with the fact that in the present case, the convict has kidnapped and murdered 17 years old boy, this Court is of the considered opinion that no illegality is committed by the authority in not granting the application of the convict. Therefore, the present application has no merits and deserves to be rejected and is accordingly rejected. Rule is discharged.

¶41

(RAJENDRA M. SAREEN,J)

¶42

DRASHTI K. SHUKLA

¶43

Page 4 of 4

Dhaval Narsinhbhai Darji Thro Narsinhbhai Dungarbhai Darji v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhaval Narsinhbhai Darji Thro Narsinhbhai Dungarbhai Darji v. State of Gujarat

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

Surabhai Nagabhai Modhvadiya Vs State of Gujarat

Mango @ Mangalbhai Pratapbhai Pagi Vs State of Gujarat

Bilal Abdulla Ismail Badam Ghanchi Thro Badam Nafisabibi Bilal Vs State of Gujarat

Mukeshbhai Nanjibhai Ninama Vs State of Gujarat

Savaji S/O. Kantibhai Devipujak Vs State of Gujarat

Ghanshyam @ Ghanti Jagjivandas Danidhariya Vs State of Gujarat