Tuesday, 21, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Kamne @ Javed Hanif Lalakhan vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 8544 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 8544 Bom
Judgement Date : 8 November, 2017

Bombay High Court
Kamne @ Javed Hanif Lalakhan vs The State Of Maharashtra on 8 November, 2017
Bench: V.K. Tahilramani
                                                                              29.wp 4172.17.doc

Urmila Ingale

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                             CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4172 OF 2017

                 Kamne @ Javed Hanif Lalakhan                     .. Petitioner
                      Vs.
                 The State of Maharashtra                        .. Respondent

                 Mr. Prosper D'Souza, for the Petitioner.
                 Mr. Arfan Sait, APP  for State.

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

08th NOVEMBER, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT.

V .K.TAHILRAMANI, J) :

1. Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner preferred an application for furlough

on 22/11/2016. The said application was rejected by order

dated 22/02/2017. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner

preferred an Appeal. The Appeal was dismissed by order dated

14/07/2017. Hence, this Petition.

3. One of the grounds on which the application of the

petitioner for furlough came to be rejected is that in 2015 when

29.wp 4172.17.doc

the petitioner was released on furlough, he committed another

offence pursuant to which C.R. No. 451 of 2015 came to be

registered at Park Site Police Station, Vikhroli, Mumbai. In view

of this fact, it is apprehended that if the petitioner is released on

furlough, he will again indulge in another offence. Looking to

the conduct of the petitioner when he was last released on

furlough, it cannot be said that this apprehension is without any

basis. Hence, we are not inclined to interfere at this stage. The

Petition is rejected. Rule is discharged. Office to communicate

this order to the petitioner who is in Nashik Road Central Prison.

(M.S.KARNIK, 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 : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter