MUKESH RAMAJI YADAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of Shri Samundre, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Shri Mirza, learned APP for the Respondents.

(2.) The case of the Petitioner is that in the year 2003, the Petitioner was released on furlough leave. He did not report back in time and there was overstay on his part by 237 days, hence, prison punishment was imposed of cutting of remission of 5 days for each day of overstay. Being aggrieved by this order, this petition has been preferred. In the petition, the Petitioner has prayed that the punishment be reduced to cutting of remission of one day for each day of overstay. He has also prayed that the Respondents be directed to file show cause notice, reply, order of Superintendent of Prison, approval of D.I.G. of Prisons and appraisal of District & Sessions Judge, approving of cutting of remission for overstay of 237 days.

(3.) As far as release of the Petitioner on furlough for the year 2003 is concerned, it is noticed that the Petitioner absconded and he did not report back to prison in time. He was eventually traced by the police, arrested and brought back to prison. Even if the Petitioner is arrested from his house it does not make his case stand on a better footing. Admittedly, he is arrested after 237 days, police would have been keeping a watch for the Petitioner and when he came home, he was arrested. Just because he was arrested from his house on the 237th day, it does not mean, he was available in his house during all those 237 days.