NILESH MAHADEO KAWRE Vs. D I G PRISON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner challenges the order dated 30/5/2013 passed by the respondent No. 1 rejecting application of the petitioner for furlough.

(2.) The application of the petitioner for furlough is rejected on two grounds - firstly, none of the close relatives of the petitioner is suffering from major ailment and secondly, other convicts in the same crime are already released on furlough and if the petitioner is released on furlough, there is a possibility of all the convicts in the same crime committing some other crime.

(3.) Insofar as first ground is concerned, question regarding major ailment or otherwise is relevant insofar as grant of parole is concerned. Grant of furlough is a right, which accrues on completion of particular period of imprisonment. As such, the said ground is without substance. Insofar as second ground is concerned, learned Counsel for the petitioner makes a categorical statement that other convicts in the same crime have already surrendered to prison. As such, rejection of the application of the petitioner on such ground is untenable.