Pyarelal Shridhar Keer @ Pahalwan vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 8361 Bom

 jdk                                                   1                                              6.crwp.2955.17.j.doc




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2955 OF 2017


Pyarelal Shridhar Keer @ Pahalwan   ]
Indian National, R/o Room No. 7,    ]
Shiv Ram Sadan, Veer Savarkar Marg, ]
Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400 0025         ]
(At present lodged at Nashik Road   ]
Central Prison, Nasik )             ].. Petitioner

                    Vs.

(1)                 The State of Maharashtra    ]
                    Through Chief Secretary,    ]
                    Home Deptt. Mantralaya,     ]
                    Mumbai 400 032              ]
                                                ]
(2)                 The Divisional Commissioner]
                    Nashik Road, Nashik         ]
                                                ]
(3)                 The Superintendent,         ]
                    Nashik Road, Central Prison ]
                    Nashik                      ]
                                                ]
(4)                 The Deputy Police           ]
                    Commissioner, Zone-8,       ]
                    Mumbai                      ].. Respondents


                             ....
Mrs. A.M.Z. Ansari along Mrs. Nasreen S.K. Ayubi Advocate for
Petitioner
Mrs. G.P.Mulekar A.P.P. for the State
                             ....



                                                                                                    1   of  3




         ::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2017                                                     ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2017 01:43:41 :::
  jdk                                                   2                                              6.crwp.2955.17.j.doc


                                        CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
                                                M.S.KARNIK, JJ.

                                        DATED : NOVEMBER                               02, 2017


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

1                   Heard both sides.



2                   The petitioner preferred an application for parole on

26.8.2015 on the ground of illness of his mother.                                                               The said

application was rejected by order dated 16.12.2015.                                                               Being

aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal.                                                                The

appeal was dismissed by order dated 31.8.2016, hence, this

petition.



3                   The application of the petitioner for parole was

rejected on the ground that if he is released on parole, he may

abscond and may not return back to the prison. As far as this

ground is concerned, there is no basis for this ground.                                                               The

order of rejection shows that the mother of the petitioner is

suffering from various ailments and surgery is necessary. The

police report of Nirmal Nagar Police Station shows that surgery

is required. In this view of the matter, we are inclined to grant

parole to the petitioner. Hence, the following order.

                                                                                                    2   of  3




         ::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2017                                                     ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2017 01:43:41 :::
              jdk                                                   3                                              6.crwp.2955.17.j.doc



                                                                        ORDER

(1) The petitioner to be released on parole for a period of

30 days on the usual terms and conditions as set out by the

competent authority.

(2) Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. Rule

made absolute in above terms.

[ M.S.KARNIK, J.] [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]

kandarkar

3 of 3