Atul Ashok Deshmukh vs Principal Secretary And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 8122 Bom

                                                                                  12. wp 3741.17.doc

Urmila Ingale

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.  3741 OF 2017

                 Atul Ashok Deshmukh                                   .. Petitioner
                       Vs.
                 Principal Secretary, 
                 Home Department,
                 Government of Maharashtra and ors.                  .. Respondents

                 Mrs.Pooja R. Thakur, for the Petitioner.
                 Mr.Arfan Sait, 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 earlier had preferred an application

for parole on the ground of illness of his mother. The said

application was rejected by an order dated 23/09/2016. Being

aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an Appeal. The

Appeal was dismissed by order dated 13/02/2017. Being

aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Criminal Writ Petition

12. wp 3741.17.doc

No. 978 of 2017 before this Court. The order dated 13/02/2017

shows that no medical reports were submitted to support the

claim of the petitioner that his mother was ill. Hence, his

application for parole came to be rejected. Learned Counsel for

the petitioner had at that time stated that due to oversight,

medical papers could not be submitted to the competent

authority. In this view of the matter, this Court disposed of the

said Writ Petition by observing that the petitioner be given an

opportunity to prefer a fresh application for parole annexing

thereto fresh medical certificate and the papers relating to the

medical tests undergone by the mother of the petitioner and/or

papers relating to treatment if any undergone by her.

3. Thereafter it is seen that the petitioner did not prefer

an application for parole before Divisional Commissioner, Nashik

that is the first authority competent to consider the application

for parole, but instead the application was made directly to the

Appellate Authority i.e. Government. The said application came

to be rejected by order dated 07/07/2017. Hence, this Petition.

12. wp 3741.17.doc

4. Learned APP pointed out that the petitioner had also

preferred an application for furlough which was rejected. In

connection to the said application, the petitioner had preferred

Criminal Writ Petition No. 2370 of 2017 before this Court. This

Court by order dated 05/10/2017 directed that the petitioner be

released on furlough for a period of 14 days. Learned APP

further drew our attention to the notification dated 26/08/2016

wherein it is stated that the prisoner shall be eligible for

subsequent relief of parole after completion of six months of

actual imprisonment to be counted from his last return either

from furlough or regular parole. Thus, it is seen that the

petitioner cannot be released on parole at this stage and it

would be open to the petitioner to prefer a fresh application for

parole as and when he becomes eligible to be released on

parole. In view of the above, no case is made out for

interference. Rule is discharged.

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