Bombay High Court
Suresh Maruti Shinde vs The State Of Maharashtra on 17 March, 2017
Bench: V.K. Tahilramani
2. cri wp 521-17.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 521 OF 2017
Suresh Maruti Shinde .. Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
...................
Appearances
Ms. Zeba Sikora i/by
Dr. Yug Mohit Chaudhry Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. H.J. Dedia APP for the State
...................
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 17, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :
1. Heard both sides.
2. The petitioner preferred an application for parole on
23.12.2015 on the ground of illness of his wife. The said
application was rejected by order dated 18.3.2016. Being
aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The
said appeal came to be dismissed by order dated
jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 3
2. cri wp 521-17.doc
17.10.2016. Hence, this petition.
3. It is seen that the appeal of the petitioner was
dismissed on the ground that he is the main accused in the
case. The second ground on which his appeal was dismissed
was that the co-accused was released on parole and he was
murdered, hence, there is danger to the life of the petitioner
if he is released on parole and there would be law and order
problem. The third reason for dismissing the appeal is that
the petitioner has furnished surety who is a lady.
4. Just because the surety is a lady, it cannot be said that
she cannot keep a watch on the petitioner and ensure that
he complies with all the terms and conditions on which he is
released on parole. Moreover, it is seen that the same suety
was furnished earlier by the petitioner when he was released
on parole / furlough and the petitioner has reported back in
time. As far as the co-accused being murdered is concerned,
it is seen that since 2011, the petitioner has been released
jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 3
2. cri wp 521-17.doc
on parole or furlough and there has been no danger to his
life. He was released on furlough on 9.7.2011, 30.11.2013
and 14.3.2016. He was also released on parole on 10.8.2012
on death parole. Thereafter, he was released on parole on
5.10.2012 and 27.8.2014. Out of six occasions that he was
released on parole and furlough, he has reported back to the
prison in time on five occasions. Except on one occasion i.e
on 9.7.2011 when he was released on furlough, he reported
back to the prison one day late. Looking to all these facts
and the fact that the conduct of the petitioner in prison is
stated to be good, we are inclined to release the petitioner
on parole for a period of 30 days.
5. The petitioner to be released on parole for a period of
30 days on furnishing the same surety i.e surety of Ujwala
Suresh Shinde and on other terms and conditions as set out
by the competent authority.
6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 3
