VIMAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application, the applicant challenges an order passed by the Administrative Officer with the Office of the Sanctioning Authority, whereby furlough application of the applicant has been rejected, mainly on two grounds; (I) that the Police has given a negative opinion and (ii) that the applicant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Ss. 363 , 366 and 373 of IPC and under the provisions of POCSO Act.

(2.) Heard learned APP Mr.Utkarsh Sharma for the respondent State and perused the papers, including the original file. It would appear that insofar as the first aspect, which has weighed with the Authority, except for the statement of the complainant, whereby the complainant has voiced apprehension that the applicant might disturb the complainant and/or her family members, there does not appear to be any material whatsoever with the Authorities, whereby they could have come to a conclusion that the applicant might abscond. As a matter of fact, it is also required to be noted that the mother of the applicant had shown willingness to stand as surety for the applicant, which ought to have allayed any apprehension about the applicant absconding.

(3.) Insofar as the aspect of the applicant having committed offences punishable under the provisions of Ss. 363 , 366 and 373 of IPC and under provisions of POCSO Act, it would be required to be noted that while the The Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 enumerates certain offences, conviction under which it would dis-entitle the convict/prisoner to request for being released on furlough leave and whereas the same are enumerated at Rule 4(2), 4(3), and 4(11) of the said Rules. It would appear that while offences punishable under Ss. 392 to 402 of the IPC, offences punishable under the Prohibition Act and offences punishable under the NDPS Act are stated to be offences, under which the convict gets dis-entitled to seek for furlough leave and whereas Rules do not contemplate any of the Ss. under which the present applicant having been convicted dis- entitle the applicant to seek for furlough leave.