SIDDHRAJ @ SURYA DHIRUBHAI MAYDAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH
- Bench
- P M RAVAL
Holding
The application for regularisation of the 235‑day delay is rejected, as the CrPC (now Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) does not permit setting aside a subsequent offence under the Prisons Act for breach of parole conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Siddhraj @ Surya Dhirubhai Mayda, was released on a 14‑day furlough leave from 5‑Sept‑2023 to 18‑Sept‑2023 but was subsequently apprehended by police, resulting in a 235‑day delay before he sought regularisation of the furlough. An application filed on 13‑May‑2025 for regularisation was rejected on 17‑July‑2025, and the prison authority deducted three furloughs by order dated 30‑May‑2024, which the applicant challenged. The Court relied on the precedent of Vikas Narendrabhai v. State of Gujarat (04‑Feb‑2014), holding that the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) does not allow setting aside a subsequent offence under the Prisons Act for breach of parole conditions. Consequently, the Court rejected the applicant’s regularisation request without examining whether the facts warranted condonation of the delay. The order was directed to be communicated to the jail authority.
Issues considered
- Whether the 235‑day delay in regularising the furlough leave can be condoned.
- Whether the Court can set aside a subsequent offence under the Prisons Act for violation of parole conditions.
- Whether the precedent of Vikas Narendrabhai v. State of Gujarat is applicable to the present facts.
Legislation cited
Subjects
Judgment
R/SCR.A/17321/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (REGULARIZED DAY OF LATE
SURRENDER) NO. 17321 of 2025
==========================================================
SIDDHRAJ @ SURYA DHIRUBHAI MAYDA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
THROUGH JAIL for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. ROHAN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 18/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant is before this Court for regularization of 235
days after being apprehended by the police authority.
2. It transpires from the jail remarks that the applicant was
released for 14 days on furlough leave from 05.09.2023 to
18.09.2023, however, he has apprehended by the police, and thus,
there was a delay of 235 days, pursuant to which, I. G. Prison was
moved by an application dated 13.05.2025 for regularization of 235
days which came to be rejected vide order dated 17.07.2025, and
the authority has imposed the punishment of deducting 3 furlough
vide order dated 30.05.2024. It is the order of rejection dated
30.05.2024 which is challenged before this Court.
3. In view of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of
Vikas Narendrabhai v. State of Gujarat, dated 04.02.2014, in
Page 1 of 2
R/SCR.A/17321/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/03/2026
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1360 of 2014, wherein it is
held that the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) does not permit to set aside the
subsequent offence committed under the Prisons Act for violation
of condition of parole.
4. In view of the same, the present application stands rejected.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the question
of whether the facts of the present case to entitle him for
condonation of delay before the jail authority.
6. Registry to communicate this order to the concerned jail
authority, forthwith, for onward communication to the applicant.
(P. M. RAVAL, J)
NITIN MAKWANA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: NITIN INDRAVADAN MAKWANA(HCW0110), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/03/2026 18:51:10
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.