Pandit Shankar Kalan vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 5072 Bom

 jdk                                                    1                                              31.crwp.2695.17.doc



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                CRIMINAL WRIT PETITOIN NO. 2695 OF 2017

Pandit Shankar Kalan                                                            ]
Age Adult, Occ: Nil                                                             ]
Residing at village Hedutane,                                                   ]
Taluka Kalyan, Dist. Thane                                                      ]
(Presently in Taloja Central Prison,                                            ]
Navi Mumbai)                                                                    ].. Petitioner

                    Vs.

1) The State of Maharashtra           ]
   Through the Secretary,             ]
   Home Department, 2nd floor,        ]
   Main Building, Madam Cama Marg, ]
   Mantralaya, Mumbai-400032          ]
                                      ]
2) The Divisional Commissioner,       ]
   Vidhan Bhavan, Pune 411001         ]
                                      ]
3) The Superintendent,                ]
   Taloja Central Prison, Navi Mumbai ].. Respondents


                              ....
Mr. Santosh Musale Advocate for Petitioner
Mr. H.J. Dedhia A.P.P. for the State
                              ....


                                        CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
                                                SANDEEP K.SHINDE, JJ.

DATED : JULY 26, 2017

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

1                   Heard both sides.


                                                                                                    1   of  3





  jdk                                                    2                                              31.crwp.2695.17.doc

2                   The petitioner preferred an application for parole on

28.12.2016. The application came to be rejected by order

dated 14.3.2017. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner

preferred an appeal. The appeal came to be dismissed by order

dated 13.6.2017, hence, this petition.

3 The order of rejection shows that the application of

the petitioner for parole came to be rejected in view of Rule

4(3) of The Maharashtra Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole)

Rules (Amendment), Rules 2016 whereas the appellate order

shows that the application of the petitioner for parole came to

be rejected in view of Rules 4(11) and 4(13). Thus, it is seen

that reasons for rejecting the application and dismissing the

appeal are not in consonance with each other and entirely

different reasons are stated in both the orders. Such orders

cannot be allowed to stand, hence, the orders are quashed and

set aside. The concerned authorities to consider the application

of the petitioner for parole afresh. The same be done within

four weeks.

4                   Rule is made absolute in above terms.                                                        It may be



                                                                                                    2   of  3





              jdk                                                    3                                              31.crwp.2695.17.doc

stated that the petitioner was initially lodged in Kalamba

Central Prison, Kolhapur, however, at present, he is lodged at

Taloja Central Prison, Navi Mumbai. The authorities to ensure

that the order is served on the petitioner who is in Taloja

Central Prison, Navi Mumbai.

[ SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. ] [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]

kandarkar

3 of 3