Shekhar @ Husnya Bhimrao Meshram ... vs The Divisional Commissioner, ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 4614 Bom

        cwp503.16                              1




                                                                                
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                        
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR


                     CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.503 OF 2016.




                                                       
       PETITIONER:             Shekhar @ Husnya Bhimrao Meshram,
                                  aged about 27 years, r/o Imamwada, P.S.




                                           
                                  Imamwada, Distt.Nagpur.
                             
                                         : VERSUS :

       RESPONDENTS: 1.    The Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur.
                            
                                   2.  The Superintendent, 
                                        Central Prison, Nagpur.
       -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      


       Mr.N.A.Badar, Advocate for the petitioner.
       Mrs.Geeta Tiwari, Addl.Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
   



       =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
                                      CORAM:      B.R.GAVAI AND 
                                                             V.M.DESHPANDE, JJ.

                                          DATED:      10th  AUGUST, 2016.



       ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R.Gavai, J.) 





       1.             Rule.     Rule   is   made   returnable   forthwith.     Heard   by

consent of learned counsel for both the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court being

aggrieved by the rejection of his application for parole leave.

3. The application is rejected on following three grounds:-

(i) That the surety of the petitioner is not

competent to keep control over the petitioner.

(ii) That the wife of the petitioner and his brother are taking care of the father of the petitioner.

(iii) If the petitioner is released on parole, there is

possibility of disturbing the law and order.

4. Insofar as the first ground is concerned, the perusal of

the police report would reveal that the petitioner's mother is

willing to stand as a surety. Merely because the surety is old-aged,

it cannot be said that she will not be able to keep control over the

petitioner.

5. Insofar as second ground is concerned, the learned

counsel for the petitioner has specifically stated that the

petitioner's brother is absconding for last ten years.

6. Insofar as the apprehension of danger to the law and

order is concerned, nothing is placed on record. On the contrary

police report states that no offence is registered against the

petitioner during the period when the petitioner was on furlough

or parole leave.

7. In that view of the matter, impugned order is quashed

and set aside. The application is allowed. The petitioner is

directed to be released on parole leave for 30 days after following

the due procedure prescribed by law.

                      JUDGE                                             JUDGE

       chute










                                                                            
                                                    
                                                   
                      -CERTIFICATE- 




                                        

I certify that this Order uploaded is a true and

correct copy of original signed order.

Uploaded by : P.Z.Chute, Pvt.Secretary.

Uploaded on: 12/08/2016.