Bombay High Court
Chandrakant Dhondu Bhoir vs The State Of Maharashtra on 13 December, 2017
5. cri wp 4421-17.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4421 OF 2017
Chandrakant Dhondu Bhoir .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
...................
Appearances
Ms. Rohini M. Dandekar Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner
Mr. Arfan Sait APP for the State
...................
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, Acting C.J. &
M.S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : DECEMBER 13, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, A.C.J.] :
1. Heard both sides.
2. The petitioner preferred an application on 25.3.2014 for
parole on the ground of illness of his mother. The said
application was granted by order dated 24.11.2014.
Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was released on parole on
1.12.2014 for a period of 30 days. Thereafter, the petitioner
preferred his first application for extension of parole for 30
jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 4
5. cri wp 4421-17.doc
days which was granted and parole period was extended till
30.1.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred second
application for extension of parole for a further period of 30
days. The said application was preferred on 14.1.2015.
However, the application came to be rejected by order dated
10.6.2015. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred
an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by order dated
7.8.2017, hence, this petition.
3. In order to support the application for extension of
parole on the ground of illness of his mother, the petitioner
relied on medical certificate dated 12.1.2015. The said
certificate shows that the mother of the petitioner was
operated successfully for renal calculi and now she is advised
to take rest of about one month w.e.f. 12.1.2015. This
certificate is issued by Dr. Ashok M. Parwani. The statement
of Dr. Parwani has been recorded and he has stated that the
petitioner had approached him and told him that his mother
had undergone an operation and she requires rest, hence,
jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 4
5. cri wp 4421-17.doc
the petitioner requested Dr. Parwani to give a certificate to
that effect. Dr. Parwani inquired with the petitioner where
his mother was operated upon and to show certificate to that
effect. However, he did not produce any such certificate.
The petitioner also did not bring the patient before the
Doctor. Dr. Parwani then gave a certificate dated 12.1.2015
stating that the mother of the petitioner was operated
successfully and she is advised to take rest for one month. It
is to be noted that Dr. Parwani does not hold M.S., M.D. or
M.B.B.S. degree but he only has the degree of L.C.E.H.
(Liceutiate of the Court of Examiners in Homeopathy). Thus,
there is no material to show that the mother of the petitioner
was in fact actually operated upon. Moreover, the certificate
issued by Dr. Parwani which has been relied upon by the
petitioner to seek extension of parole cannot be relied upon
to substantiate his claim that his mother was indeed
operated upon and she required rest.
jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 4
5. cri wp 4421-17.doc
4. The conduct of the petitioner is also to be taken into
account. During the period of parole, the petitioner was
directed to attend Hill Line Police Station. He attended the
police station from 2.12.2014 to 4.1.2015. Thereafter, the
petitioner did not attend the police station till he surrendered
to the prison which was on 1.3.2015.
5. Looking to the medical certificate and the other facts,
we do not think that this is a fit case to extend the period of
parole, hence, the prayer for extension of parole is rejected.
Rule is discharged.
[ M.S. KARNIK, J ] [ ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj 4 of 4
