Ramkrishna Narsimha Gawda vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 8119 Bom

                                                                                  15. wp 3763.17.doc

Urmila Ingale

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3763 OF 2017

                 Ramkrishna Narsimha Gawda                                    .. Petitioner
                      Vs.
                 The State of Maharashtra                                   .. Respondent

                 Ms.Rohini M. Dandekar, for the Petitioner.
                 Mrs.G.P. Mulekar, APP  for State.

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

12th OCTOBER, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT.

V .K.TAHILRAMANI, J.) :

1. Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner preferred an application on

05/11/2016 seeking death parole on the ground that his mother

has expired on 21/8/2016. The said application was rejected by

order dated 20/03/2017. Being aggrieved thereby, the

petitioner preferred an Appeal. The Appeal was dismissed by

order dated 13/06/2017.

3. The application of the petitioner for death parole

15. wp 3763.17.doc

came to be rejected on the ground that there would be no

possibility of the petitioner returning to the jail if he is released

on death parole. 2nd ground is that the petitioner does not have

any important work to avail parole leave.

4. As far as 1st ground is concerned, it is seen that on

09/11/2013, the petitioner was released on parole and he has

reported back to the prison on his own one day prior to the date

that he was supposed to report back to the prison. This shows

that the petitioner does not have any tendency of absconding.

Hence, 1st ground for rejection is without any basis.

5. As far as 2nd ground is concerned that he does not

have any important work to avail parole leave, the fact that his

mother has expired and some religious rites would be necessary

to be conducted would be a sufficient ground.

6. The Appellate order dated 13/06/2017 shows that

the mother had expired on 21/8/2016, hence, 9 months

thereafter he could not be granted parole to conduct religious

15. wp 3763.17.doc

rites. As far as this ground is concerned, it is seen that an

application for parole has to be decided within 45 days. It is the

Authority which took time from 05/11/2016 to 13/06/2017 to

decide the application of the petitioner for death parole. The

Authority cannot take advantage of their own delay. We do not

find this also to be a good ground to not to allow the petitioner

to be released on parole.

7. Looking to the facts and circumstances, on

humanitarian ground, we are inclined to release the petitioner

on death parole for a period of 7 days. The petitioner to be

released on death parole for 7 days on the usual terms and

conditions as set out by the jail authority. Rule is made absolute

in the above terms.

8. Office to communicate this order to the petitioner

who is in Nashik Road Central Prison as well as Divisional

Commissioner, Nashik.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.)