R.M. Borde, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the respective parties and taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

2. The petitioner is undertrial prisoner facing charges u/s. 302, 364, 201, 120(B), 143, 147, 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999. The petitioner is charged for commission of aforesaid offences along with other co-accused named in the charge-sheet. It is informed that, there are four charge-sheets presented to the Court wherein the petitioner is arrayed as an accused. The petitioner is arrested in connection with Crime No. I-21/2012 on 26.04.2012 and was remanded in PCR and finally he has been sent to magisterial custody. The petitioner was lodged at Central Prison at Aurangabad. A charge-sheet has been presented against the petitioner in the Special Court bearing Special Case No. 21/2012 and the case is pending before the Special Judge (MCOC Act) at Aurangabad.

3. The petitioner is resident of Aurangabad and his all relations are staying at Aurangabad. The petitioner is making grievance in respect of his transfer from Aurangabad Central Jail to Nashik Central Jail without assigning any reason or without extending any opportunity of being heard to him. It is contended that, undertrial prisoner has been transferred to Nashik Central Prison in the month of August-September 2015. The presence of the petitioner is required in Special Case No. 21 of 2012, pending before the Special Court at Aurangabad and his transfer to Nashik Central Prison is arbitrary and in breach of provisions of Section 29 of the Prisoners Act, 1900 and violative of the directions issued by the Supreme Court of India in the matter of State of Maharashtra & Ors. v. Saeed Sohail Shaikh etc. reported in 2012 (12) LJSOFT 445.

4. An affidavit-in-reply has been presented on behalf of the respondent, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner is an undertrial prisoner No. 109/2015 and is a member of Imran Mehandi Gang. It is contended that, the gang has a membership of 13 individuals and all are active in Aurangabad city. It is contended that, the members of gang are habitual offenders indulging in offences like riots, theft, kidnapping, kidnapping for ransom, murder, counterfeiting documents and arms act etc. It is contended that, the gang members have extracted money and are instrumental in five murders committed around the city. It is contended that, proper arrangement could not be made for lodging the undertrial prisoner i.e. the petitioner herein at Central Prison on account of overcrowding of the Jail and paucity of sufficient space. It is contended that, a direction regarding transfer has been sought for from Dy. Inspector General of Prison, Central Prison, Aurangabad and in view of the permission accorded by the higher authorities the petitioner has been transferred to Central Prison at Nashik. It is also pointed out that an application was moved to the learned Special Judge, which is at Exh. 30, in Special (MCOCA) Case No.21/2012. Considering the order passed, the petitioner has been transferred to Nashik Central Prison. The petitioner contends that, there is no provision empowering the Jail authorities to transfer an undertrial prisoner from one prison to another. It is contended that, the petitioner is facing trial before the Special Court at Aurangabad and is required to be produced before the court on the date prescribed by the court and it is thus logical and mandatory also for the Jail authorities to keep the petitioner in magisterial custody only at Aurangabad. It is stated that, the provisions of Section 29 of the Prisoners Act, 1900 empowers the State Government to issue a general or special order providing for removal of any prisoner confined in a prison and transfer him, however, such order shall be passed in the circumstances prescribed under sub-section 1 of Section 29 of the Priso