Criminal Writ Petition No. 9 of 2012. Case: Jagdish Solanki Vs State of Goa and Ors. Bombay High Court

Case NumberCriminal Writ Petition No. 9 of 2012
Party NameJagdish Solanki Vs State of Goa and Ors
CounselFor Petitioner: S. Shetkar, Adv. and For Respondents: C. A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor
JudgesF. M. Reis, J.
IssuePrisons Act (9 of 1894) - Section 59; Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules (1959) - Rule 4
Citation2012 CriLJ 2277
Judgement DateApril 04, 2012
CourtBombay High Court

Judgment:

  1. Heard Shri S. Shetkar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri C.A. Ferreira, the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

  2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel.

  3. The above petition challenges the condition imposed by the respondent No. 2 whilst granting furlough to the petitioner by order dated 19-9-2011 whereby one of the conditions imposed by the said order being condition No. 1 is that the petitioner was called upon to furnish the bond of Rs. 1 lac and produce one surety of the like amount by giving cash or otherwise.

  4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner does not have the necessary means to furnish such a personal bond and produce the surety of the like amount in the sum of Rs. 1 lac and, as such, he is not in a position to be released on furlough as ordered by the impugned order. The learned counsel has pointed out that the amount of personal bond and the surety be accordingly reduced. The learned Public Prosecutor has produced a letter and a report from the Superintendent of Police of Diu stating inter alia that the total monthly income of the petitioner is Rs. 12,000/-

  5. Considering the said aspect, I find that the respondent No. 2 was not justified to impose a condition to execute personal bond of a sum of Rs. 1 lac and produce a surety of the like amount.

  6. ...

To continue reading

Request your trial