2. cri wp 521-17.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 521 OF 2017
Suresh Maruti Shinde .. Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
...................
Appearances
Ms. Zeba Sikora i/by
Dr. Yug Mohit Chaudhry Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. H.J. Dedia APP for the State
...................
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 17, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :
1. Heard both sides.
2. The petitioner preferred an application for parole on 23.12.2015 on the ground of illness of his wife. The said application was rejected by order dated 18.3.2016. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The said appeal came to be dismissed by order dated jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2017 01:08:27 :::
2. cri wp 521-17.doc 17.10.2016. Hence, this petition.
3. It is seen that the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed on the ground that he is the main accused in the case. The second ground on which his appeal was dismissed was that the co-accused was released on parole and he was murdered, hence, there is danger to the life of the petitioner if he is released on parole and there would be law and order problem. The third reason for dismissing the appeal is that the petitioner has furnished surety who is a lady.
4. Just because the surety is a lady, it cannot be said that she cannot keep a watch on the petitioner and ensure that he complies with all the terms and conditions on which he is released on parole. Moreover, it is seen that the same suety was furnished earlier by the petitioner when he was released on parole / furlough and the petitioner has reported back in time. As far as the co-accused being murdered is concerned, it is seen that since 2011, the petitioner has been released jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2017 01:08:27 :::
2. cri wp 521-17.doc on parole or furlough and there has been no danger to his life. He was released on furlough on 9.7.2011, 30.11.2013 and 14.3.2016. He was also released on parole on 10.8.2012 on death parole. Thereafter, he was released on parole on 5.10.2012 and 27.8.2014. Out of six occasions that he was released on parole and furlough, he has reported back to the prison in time on five occasions. Except on one occasion i.e on 9.7.2011 when he was released on furlough, he reported back to the prison one day late. Looking to all these facts and the fact that the conduct of the petitioner in prison is stated to be good, we are inclined to release the petitioner on parole for a period of 30 days.
5. The petitioner to be released on parole for a period of 30 days on furnishing the same surety i.e surety of Ujwala Suresh Shinde and on other terms and conditions as set out by the competent authority.
6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2017 01:08:27 :::