Babakhan @ Babasaheb Shivaji ... vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 7610 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 7610 Bom
Judgement Date : 22 December, 2016

Bombay High Court

Babakhan @ Babasaheb Shivaji ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 22 December, 2016

Bench: V.K. Tahilramani

                                                                   (4)WPNo.43152016(2)

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                
                                CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE

              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITIONER NO.4315 OF 2016




                                                        
    Babakhan @ Babahsaheb Shivaji Bhosale ...        Petitioner
         V/s.




                                                       
    The State of Maharashtra                    ...  Respondent
                                  .....

Mr.Prosper D'souza, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.Arfan Sait, APP for the Respondent/State.

....

ig CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI & A. M. BADAR JJ.

DATED : 22nd DECEMBER 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J) 1 Heard both sides.

2 Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and the

matter is heard finally.

3 The petitioner preferred an application for death

parole on 18/05/2016. The said application was rejected on

14/09/2016, hence this petition.



    4                  The brother of the petitioner has expired on

    30/04/2016.                  Thereafter,   the   petitioner      preferred          an


    Gaikwad RD                                                                           1/2





                                                               (4)WPNo.43152016(2)

application for death parole on 18/05/2016. The said

application has been rejected. However, there is remedy of

preferring an appeal, which has been communicated to the

detenue by the order of rejection dated 14/09/2016 which has

been annexed by the petitioner to this petition.

5 In this view of the matter, we are not inclined to

interfere and the petitioner is relegated to the remedy of

preferring an appeal, hence Rule is discharged.

6 Office to communicate this order to the petitioner,

who is in Nashik Road Central Prison.

      
   



    (A. M. BADAR J.)                   (SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI J.)






    Gaikwad RD                                                                      2/2