The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of a convict to be released on furlough as per the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, and the requirement for specific evidence to support adverse reports from authorities.

JUDGMENT

S.S. Shinde, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. Factual matrix of the case is as under:-

The Petitioner is wife of convict namely Virendra Thakur who is convict no. 7431 at Kolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba, Dist. Kolhapur. It is stated that the convict was arrested in the month of August 2013. Thereafter, the convict was tried for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC and convicted by Sessions Court, Mumbai, by judgment and order dated 27.12.2019 in Special Case No. 2 of 2014. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. Initially, he was in Yerwada Jail at Pune, however, he came to be transferred to Kolharpur Central Prison, Kalamba, Dist, Kolhapur.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the convict i.e. her husband has undergone 7 years and 7 months imprisonment and including remission more than 8 years. The convict applied for furlough, however by order dated 23rd June 2020, his prayer for release on furlough had turned down by the concerned authority. Being aggrieved by the order dated 23rd June 2020 passed by Respondent No. 2, the convict filed appeal before the 1st respondent. The said appeal came to be rejected on 02.11.2020. Being aggrieved by the order of appellate authority, the present petition is filed.

4. Mr. Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the observations made by 2nd respondent while rejecting the application of convict that there is threat to the life of witnesses, are vague and general. The relatives of the convict are ready to stand as surety and in case, the convict is released, they are ready to keep control on his activities. Learned counsel submitted that this Court may consider the prayer to release the convict on furlough by imposing stringent conditions and direct the convict to attend the police station on daily basis. The convict is ready to give solvent surety and will also abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this Court.

5. Learned PP appearing for Respondent-State relying upon the reasons assigned in the impugned orders submitted that the petition is devoid of any merits and same may be rejected.

6. We have given due consideration to the rival submissions. With the able assistance of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned PP, we have perused the pleadings and grounds taken in the petition and annexures thereto. It appears that the husband of the petitioner i.e. convict has not been released even once after his conviction. We have carefully perused the impugned order dated 23rd June 2020 passed by the Respondent No. 2. It appears that the office of Deputy Commissioner of Police, Chembur, had given adverse report. The another reason given in the impugned order is that, in case, the convict is released on furlough he is likely to abscond. The concerned authority has invoked Sub Rule 20 of Rule 4 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 (hereinafater referred to as 'said Rules'), in support of the reason given in the impugned order that in case the convict is released he is likely to abscond. The third reason stated in the impugned order is that it is not the right of the convict to ask for furlough leave. The said order was assailed by the convict before the appellate authority, however, appellate authority confirmed the order passed by Respondent No. 2.

7. The respondents have not brought on record documents showing that the husband of the petitioner was earlier released on furlough or parole. It is not in dispute that the convict has undergone more than 7 years imprisonment, and he was never released on furlough/parole. At this juncture it would be apt to reproduce herein below Rule 1(A) of the said Rule.

*[1(A). Objectives:-

Furlough and Parole leaves to inmates are progressive measures of correctional services. The objectives of releasing a prisoner on leave are:-

(a) To enable the inmate to maintain continuing with his family life an