Dnyaneshwar Rajaram Dhephe vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors

Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 574 Bom
Judgement Date : 17 January, 2018

Bombay High Court
Dnyaneshwar Rajaram Dhephe vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 17 January, 2018
                                                                 27. Cri. WP 1637-17.doc

DDR

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1637 OF 2017


       Mr. Dnyaneshwar Rajaram Dhephe                         ...Petitioner
                                                         (Org.Accused/Convict)
                  Vs.
       The State of Maharashtra & ors.               ...Respondents
                                  ...........
       Mr. Prashant Badole, Advocate for the petitioner.

       Mr. Arfan Sait, A.P.P. - State.
                                           ...........

                        CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.  
                                       AND M.S.KARNIK, J.

DATE : 17th JANUARY, 2018.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. V .K. TAHILRAMANI, A.C.J.) :-

Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner is undergoing life imprisonment in Kolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba, Kolhapur. The case of the petitioner is that he has completed 14 years of actual imprisonment, however, his case for premature release is not yet decided by the State Government. This petition was filed on 13/4/2017.

1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:00:56 :::

27. Cri. WP 1637-17.doc

3. Learned APP pointed out that the case has been categorized and decided by the State Government by order dated 28th September, 2017. The said order and annexure are taken on record and marked "X colly" for identification. As the grievance of the petitioner was that the Government was not deciding his case for premature release, in view of the fact that the Government has decided the same, this petition is infructuous, hence, rule is discharged.

4. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision dated 28th September, 2017, it could be open to him to challenge the same.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 2/2 ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:00:56 :::