Rajan John Rajmani vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2018 Latest Caselaw 467 Bom

                                                                         32. wp 5277.17.doc

Urmila Ingale

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5277 OF 2017

                 Rajan John Rajmani
                 Age: 31 years, Occu: Service,
                 R/o. Flat No. 16, S.No. 52,
                 Pride Platinum, Bhagyodaya
                 Nagar, Kondhwakhurd, Dist. Pune,
                 (At present lodged in Yerwada 
                 Central Jail, Pune)                       .. Petitioner

                           Vs.

                       The State of Maharashtra
                      1.
                       The Inspector General of Prison,
                      2.
                 Western Zone Pune.
                    3. The Jail Superintendent,
                 Yerwada Central Prison, Pune.
                    4. The Inspector of Police,
                 Wanorie Police Station, Pune.
                    5. The Inspector of Police
                 Kondwa Police Station.             .. Respondents

                 Mrs.Harjeet Kaur Bhagwant Singh, for the Petitioner.
                 Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP  for State.

                                        CORAM : SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.
                                                 AND M.S.KARNIK, J.

15th JANUARY, 2018

ORAL JUDGMENT ( SMT.

V .K.TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.) :

1. Heard both sides.

32. wp 5277.17.doc

2. The petitioner has preferred an application for

parole on the ground that Holy Communion of his son is to take

place on 28/01/2018. Rule 19 of The Prisons (Bombay

Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 does not provide for granting

parole on such ground. The grounds on which parole can be

granted are limited and present case is not covered by one of

those grounds. Hence, we are not inclined to interfere. Rule is

discharged.

3. At this stage, we are informed that the petitioner has

also preferred Cri. Application No. 1752 of 2017 for temporary

bail before this Court as the Appeal No. 1017 of 2015 preferred

by the appellant against his conviction and sentence is pending

before this Court. It would be open to the petitioner to pursue

his prayer in the said Application i.e. Cri. Application No. 1752

of 2017 which is for temporary bail.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)