Narsing Dhondiba Pol vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 7632 Bom

 jdk                                                 1                                              16.crwp.3492.17.j.doc


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                     WRIT PETITION NO. 3492 OF 2017

Narsing Dhondiba Pol
C/7261, Nasik Road,
Central Prison, Nasik                                                           .. Petitioner

                    Vs.

The State of Maharashtra                                                        .. Respondent

                              ....
Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate appointed for Petitioner
Mr. Arfan Sait A.P.P. for the State
                              ....


                    CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND
                            DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 27, 2017

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

1                   Heard both sides.



2                   The petitioner preferred an application dated 4.7.2016

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

application was granted by order dated 3.5.2017. The

petitioner is aggrieved by clause 8 of the said order granting

parole. In the said order, it is mentioned that as per Rule 7(i) of

the Notification dated 26.8.2016, the petitioner would have to

furnish two sureties. As the petitioner has already furnished

1 of 3

jdk 2 16.crwp.3492.17.j.doc

surety of Shri. Bandoji Maroti Hotkar (petitioner's sister's

husband), he was directed to furnish one more surety as

envisaged under Rule 7(i) of the Notification dated 26.8.2016.

The relevant Rule 7 of the said Notification, reads as under:

"7. In Rule - 24A- After the words "as may be specified by the competent authority" following portion shall be inserted, namely:-

"and also upon the prisoner making a refundable deposit of adequate amount (not less than Rs.15,000) and execute a surety bond, with atleast two sureties from following categories, namely:-

(i) Central or State Govt. Employee ;

(ii) Elected Local representatives;

(iii) Family members having good antecedents;

or

(iv) Friends and relatives having good antecedents."

3 It is to be noted that this Notification is dated

26.8.2016, whereas the application of the petitioner is dated

4.7.2016, hence, this Notification cannot be made applicable

retrospectively to the application of the petitioner which was

filed on 4.7.2016 i.e. much before the date of Notification. In

this view of the matter, the petitioner would be entitled to be

2 of 3

jdk 3 16.crwp.3492.17.j.doc

released on furnishing just one surety which he has already

furnished. Thus, the order dated 3.5.2017 is modified to the

petitioner furnishing only one surety i.e. surety of Bandoji

Maroti Hotkar and four weeks' time is granted to the petitioner

to comply with the requisite requirements.

4 In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. Rule

is made absolute in above terms. Office to forthwith

communicate this order to the petitioner who is in Nasik Road

Central Prison, Nasik.

[DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI,J.] [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]

kandarkar

3 of 3