(1.) Present petition has been filed for following reliefs -
(2.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. R.A. Jaiswal for petitioner and learned APP Mr. V.K. Kotecha for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
(3.) Learned Advocate appearing for petitioner submits that petitioner was convicted on 8/9/2016 for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 etc. of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Sessions Case No.311/2014 by learned City Sessions Court, Greater Bombay. He was sentenced to death for the offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence under Sec. 326(B) of the Indian Penal Code. This Court by order dtd. 12/6/2019 modified the order in Confirmation Case and set aside the death penalty and commuted to sentence of imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He was then transferred from Yerwada Central Prison to Open Prison, Paithan on 24/3/2024. He was granted furlough leave on 4/11/2024. He returned to prison on 3/12/2024 and at the time of taking his bag it is stated that he was found with mobile battery. Show cause notice was given, which was replied by petitioner; yet, offence was registered under Sec. 223 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita vide Crime No.458/2024 and on the same day he was transferred to the closed prison at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. Opportunity of hearing was not given to petitioner and this amounts to punishing the petitioner twice i.e. putting him in closed prison again and also asking him to face the trial for the offence under Sec. 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. If we read the impugned approved order dtd. 27/1/2025 passed by respondent No.4 as well as decision of the Open Selection Committee dtd. 10/1/2025, then it can be seen that they are in contravention of Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Open Prison Rules, 1971 and also against the principles of natural justice. The petitioner needs to be sent back to the open prison by setting aside the impugned order.