Suresh Shankar Sawant vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 7691 Bom

Dixit
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                         CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3294 OF 2017
        Suresh Shankar Sawant,                              ]
        Age : 52 Years, C-6503,                             ]
        R/of Brahmanwadi, Post Gojegaon,                    ]
        District Satara.                                    ]
        Presently lodged at Kolhapur Central                ]
        Prison, Kalamba, Kolhapur                           ] .... Petitioner
                    Versus
        1. The State of Maharashtra                         ]
                                                            ]
        2. The Secretary, Home Department,                  ]
           Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.                    ]
                                                            ]
        3. Divisional Commissioner,                         ]
           Pune Division, Council Hall,                     ]
           Pune - 411 001.                                  ]
                                                            ]
        4. Senior Police Inspector,                         ]
           Satara Police Station, Satara.                   ]
                                                            ]
        5. Sub-Divisional Police Officer,                   ]
           Satara City Division, Satara.                    ]
                                                            ]
        6. Superintendent of Prison,                        ]
           Kolhapur Central Prison,                         ]
           Kalamba, Kolhapur.                               ] .... Respondents

Mrs. Farhana Shah for the Petitioner.

Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, A.P.P., for the Respondent-State.

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.J.

DATE : 28TH SEPTEMBER, 2017.

WP-3294-17.doc

ORAL JUDGMENT : [ Per Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J. ]

1. Heard both sides.

2. The Petitioner preferred an application for parole on 20 th July

2016 on the ground of illness of his wife. The said application was

rejected by order dated 28th October 2016. Being aggrieved thereby,

the Petitioner preferred an Appeal. The Appeal was dismissed by

order dated 15th February 2017; hence, this Petition.

3. The application of the Petitioner for parole came to be rejected

only on the ground that, if the Petitioner is released on parole, there

would be danger to the life of the witnesses, including the son of the

Deceased. As far as the appellate order is concerned, it stated that,

in view of the Notification dated 26th August 2016, a Prisoner should

have completed three years of imprisonment after conviction, only

then he will be eligible to be released on parole.

4. As far as the appellate order is concerned, it is an admitted fact

that the application of the Petitioner is dated 20 th July 2016. Hence,

the Notification dated 26th August 2016 cannot be made

retrospectively applicable to the application of the Petitioner, which

was made on 20th July 2016. Hence, the appellate order is set aside.

WP-3294-17.doc

5. As far as the order of rejection is concerned, the learned

counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner, during the

period of parole, will reside at his cousin brother's house, namely,

Rajaram Namdev Chavan, who resides at "At Post : Ekambe, Taluka

Koregaon, District Satara" and the said residence is within the

jurisdiction of Koregaon Police Station, District Satara; whereas,

'Brahmanwadi' is more than 18 kms. away from 'Ekambe'.

6. In this view of the matter, we are inclined to set aside the order

of rejection and direct that the Petitioner be released on parole on

usual terms and condition, as set out by the Jail Authorities, including

the fact that one of the conditions will be that the Petitioner will not

reside in "Bramhanwadi", but he will reside at "At Post : Ekambe,

Taluka Koregaon, District Satara".

7. Writ Petition is allowed.

8. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

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

WP-3294-17.doc