Stive @ Lisban John Miranda vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 3239 Bom

 jdk                                               1                                                    5.cr.wp.2158.17.j.doc


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2158 OF 2017


Stive @ Lisban John Miranda                                                     ]
Aged 40 years, Occ: Nil                                                         ]
Residing at Flat No. 401, 4th floor,                                            ]
Nilgagan Society, D.N. Nagar,                                                   ]
Opp. Idgah Ground, Andheri (W)                                                  ]
Mumbai 400 058                                                                  ]
(Now confined at Nasik Road                                                     ]
Central Prison, Nasik Road)                                                     ].. Petitioner

                    Vs.

1) The State of Maharashtra                                                     ]
                                                                                ]
2) The Superintendent                                                           ]
   Nasik Road Central Prison,                                                   ]
   Nasik Road                                                                   ]
                                                                                ]
3) Divisional Commissioner,                                                     ]
   Nasik Division, Nasik Road,                                                  ]
   422101                                                                       ].. Respondents


                             ....
Mr. N.N.Gawankar Advocate i/b Mr. Manas N. Gawankar
Advocate for Petitioner
Mrs. G.P.Mulekar A.P.P. for the State
                             ....


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

DATED : JUNE 15, 2017

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

1                   Heard both sides.                          Rule.           By consent, rule is made

                                                                                                    1   of  2





              jdk                                               2                                                    5.cr.wp.2158.17.j.doc

returnable forthwith and the matter is finally heard.

2 The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the

petitioner had preferred an application for parole on 22.5.2017,

however, the learned A.P.P. states that the consent of the

petitioner for being released on parole was given on 10.6.2017.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the prayer

in the said application was that the petitioner be released on

parole. The prayer in the present petition is that the concerned

authority to dispose of the said application at the earliest.

3 Rules relating to parole provide that an application for

parole has to be decided within 45 days. Thus the concerned

authorities to take a decision on the said parole application

within a period of 45 days. Ordered accordingly.

4 Rule is made absolute in above terms. Petition is

disposed of accordingly.

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

kandarkar

2 of 2