Manik Ananta Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2016 Latest Caselaw 6381 Bom

                                                                                  3. cri wp 3764-16.doc


RMA      
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION




                                                                                                
                          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3764 OF 2016




                                                                        
            Manik Ananta Patil                                           .. Petitioner

                                 Versus




                                                                       
            The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                              .. Respondents

                                                  ...................
            Appearances




                                                            
            Mr. N.N. Gawankar i/by
            Mr. Manas N. Gawankar Advocate for the Petitioner
                                              
            Mr. H.J. Dedia         APP for the State
                                     ...................
                                             
                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

1. Heard both sides.

2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he preferred an

application for parole on 10.8.2016. The police report was

called for and the police report has been received, however,

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2

3. cri wp 3764-16.doc

till today, his application for parole has not been decided.

Thus, the only prayer of the petitioner is that his application

be decided at the earliest.

4. In view of above, if the parole application of the

petitioner is not already decided, it be decided within a

period of three weeks from the date of communication of this

order.

5. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to

communicate this order to the concerned authority.

    [ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ]           [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]





    jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                         2 of 2