Bombay High Court Allows Convict's Furlough Petition Despite Adverse Police Report — Emphasizes Need for Reformation Opportunity. Rejection of furlough on ground that surety may not be able to control convict is speculative and cannot be sustained without giving opportunity to convict and surety.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 81
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Amol Dattarao Choudante, a convict lodged at Nashik Road Central Prison, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, seeking quashing of the order rejecting his furlough application. The respondents included the State of Maharashtra and prison authorities. The petitioner had been convicted and was behind bars for more than 4 years and 11 months from the date of conviction. He had never been released on furlough before. The prison authorities rejected his furlough application on two grounds: an adverse police report and the fact that the surety offered by the petitioner was a resident of another place and might not be able to control him. The petitioner, through his appointed advocate, challenged the rejection. The court considered the submissions and record. It held that the reason regarding the surety's inability to control the petitioner could not be accepted without first giving an opportunity to the petitioner and the surety. The court emphasized that the petitioner, having been incarcerated for a substantial period, should be given a chance to demonstrate improvement in his conduct. The court found the rejection to be based on speculative grounds and not sustainable. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, set aside the rejection order, and directed the release of the petitioner on furlough subject to usual terms and conditions and by accepting the surety offered by him. The rule was made absolute in those terms.

Headnote

A) Prison Law - Furlough - Rejection of Furlough - Adverse Police Report - The court held that the reason that the surety may not be able to control the petitioner cannot be accepted before giving opportunity to the petitioner and surety. The petitioner, a convict who had been behind bars for more than 4 years 11 months from the date of conviction, was entitled to a first opportunity to show improvement in conduct. (Paras 2-3)

B) Prison Law - Furlough - First Furlough - Opportunity for Reformation - The court held that the opportunity needs to be given to the convict to show that he has improved his conduct. The rejection of furlough on speculative grounds is not sustainable. (Paras 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the rejection of furlough application on the ground of adverse police report and that the surety may not be able to control the petitioner is sustainable in law

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Petition allowed. The order rejecting furlough is set aside. The furlough application is allowed. The petitioner is to be released on furlough subject to usual terms and conditions and by accepting the surety offered by him. Rule made absolute.

Law Points

  • Furlough rejection cannot be based on speculative grounds
  • opportunity for reformation must be given
  • surety's ability to control cannot be presumed without opportunity
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (07) 38

Criminal Writ Petition No.962 of 2019

2019-07-09

T.V. Nalawade, K.K. Sonawane

Shaikh Wajeed Ahmed (appointed) for Petitioner, A.S. Shinde for Respondents

Amol S/o Dattarao Choudante

The State of Maharashtra, Dy. Inspector General (Prison), Central Region, Aurangabad, Inspector General (Prison), Pune, Maharashtra State, Superintendent of Jail, Nashik Road, Central Prison, Nashik, The Superintendent of Police, Nanded, Dist. Nanded

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging rejection of furlough application.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of order rejecting furlough application and direction to release the petitioner on furlough.

Filing Reason

Rejection of furlough application on grounds of adverse police report and that surety may not be able to control the petitioner.

Previous Decisions

The prison authorities rejected the furlough application; no prior judicial orders mentioned.

Issues

Whether the rejection of furlough application on the ground of adverse police report and that the surety may not be able to control the petitioner is sustainable in law.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that he has been behind bars for more than 4 years 11 months and this would be his first furlough; he should be given an opportunity to show improvement. Respondents relied on adverse police report and that surety is from another place and may not be able to control the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi

The reason that the surety may not be able to control the petitioner cannot be accepted before giving opportunity to the petitioner and surety. A convict who has been incarcerated for a substantial period must be given an opportunity to show improvement in conduct before denying furlough on speculative grounds.

Judgment Excerpts

This Court holds that the opportunity needs to be given to him to show that he has improved the conduct. The reason given that surety may not be able to control to the petitioner cannot be accepted before giving opportunity to the petitioner and surety.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, challenging the order of the prison authorities rejecting his furlough application. The court heard both sides and disposed of the petition finally.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal as Not Maintainable in Hindu Marriage Act Case — Only First Appeal Lies to High Court Under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Notification Under Section 3(b) Vesting Powers of District Judge in Civil ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Wife's Appeal in Maintenance Case Under Section 125 CrPC, Reversing Lower Courts' Orders. The Court held that maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is a social justice measure, and the wife's entitlement is not negated by living sep...