Govind Kisan Bagade vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 4899 Bom

Rane                              * 1/4 *                WP-1479-2017
                                                             21.7.2017

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

         CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1479 OF 2017


Govind Kisan Bagade
Age : 36 years, R/at : Humbe Vasti,
Village : Manjargaon, Tal. Karmala,
Dist : Solapur
(At present lodged at Pune Central
Prison, Pune. Convict No.C/16226
                                                           ......Petitioner

         V/s.

1.   The State of Maharashtra
2.   The Divisional Commissioner,
Pune Division, Pune.                                  .......Respondents


                               ------


Mr. D.G. Khamkar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP for the State, respondent.


                 CORAM :-               SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, &

                                        SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE :- 21 ST JULY, 2017.

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

1. Heard both sides.

 Rane                             * 2/4 *              WP-1479-2017
                                                          21.7.2017

2. The petitioner preferred an application on 30 th

April, 2016 for parole on the ground of illness of his

daughter. The said application was granted by order

dated 23rd June, 2016. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner

was released on parole for 30 days i.e. from 24 th July,

2016 to 22nd August, 2016. Thereafter, the petitioner

preferred the first application for extension of parole on

3rd August, 2016 which application was granted and the

parole period was extended from 23rd August, 2016 to 21st

September, 2016. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred

second application for extension of parole on 14th

September, 2016. The said application was rejected on

the ground that in view of the Notification dated 26 th

August, 2016 parole cannot be granted for more than 60

days. Being aggrieved by this rejection, the present

petition has been preferred.

3. As stated earlier, initially the application of the

petitioner for being released on parole was preferred on

30th April, 2016. In this view of the mater, Notification

Rane * 3/4 * WP-1479-2017 21.7.2017

dated 24th August, 2016 cannot be made retrospectively

applicable to the petitioner. If the original application for

parole is prior to the Notification dated 26 th August, 2016

the said Notification cannot be made applicable to that

application or any application preferred thereafter for

extension. Hence, we do not consider this to be a good

ground to reject the application of the petitioner for

extension of parole for further period of 30 days.

4. It is an admitted fact that as soon as extended

period of 30 days expired on 21st October, 2016 the

petitioner surrendered back to the prison. It is also an

admitted fact that, he has diligently followed all the terms

and conditions imposed on him while granting parole

including reporting to the police station. Looking to the

above facts and the Medical Certificate, on humanitarian

grounds, the parole period is extended by a further period

of 30 days. Any prison punishment imposed on account of

overstay of 30 days is set aside. Rule is made absolute in

above terms.

 Rane                           * 4/4 *            WP-1479-2017
                                                      21.7.2017



(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J)              (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J)