Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ashok Parshuram Yadav vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 3303 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 3303 Bom
Judgement Date : 16 June, 2017

Bombay High Court
Ashok Parshuram Yadav vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 June, 2017
Bench: V.K. Tahilramani
Rane                              * 1/2 *      WP-1826-2017 (sr.11)
                                                  Friday, 16.6.2017

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

            CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1826 OF 2017



Ashok Parshuram Yadav                              ......Petitioner
     V/s.
The State of Maharashtra                           .......Respondent

                                       -----

Mr. Prosper D'souza, Advocate appointed for the petitioner.

Mr. H.J. Dedia, APP for respondent, State.


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

                               SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE : 16 June, 2017.

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

1. Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner preferred an application for

furlough on 12th October, 2016. The said Application was

rejected by order dated 22nd December, 2016. Being

aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The

Rane * 2/2 * WP-1818-2017 (sr.10) Friday, 16.6.2017

said Appeal was dismissed by order dated 31 st March,

2017, hence, this petition.

3. The application of the petitioner for furlough

came to be rejected on the ground that, on 24 th June, 2008

the petitioner was released on furlough for a period of 14

days. However, he did not report back to the prison in

time. It is seen that, ultimately the petitioner had to be

traced and arrested by the police and brought back to the

prison. There was overstay of 907 days on the part of the

petitioner.

4. In view of this fact, it is apprehended that, if the

petitioner is released on furlough, he will not report back to

the prison in time and he will abscond. Looking to the

conduct of the petitioner, it cannot be said that, this

apprehension is without any basis. In this view of the

matter, we are not inclined to grant furlough. Rule is

discharged.

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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter