Raju Sakharam Ghurup vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 6543 Bom

                                               1/4                         CRWP-1233-2020.doc




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1233 OF 2020

Raju Sakharam Ghurup
Convict No. C-10691
At Presently lodged in
Nashik Road, Central Prison
Jail Road, Nashik Road, Nashik.                           ...PETITIONER

         Versus

The State of Maharashtra                                  ...RESPONDENT
                                     ...
Ms. Bhairavi A. Ranpise, appointed for Petitioner.
Mrs. S.D. Shinde, APP for State.
                                     ...

                                        CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
                                                 MANISH PITALE, JJ.

RESERVED ON : 8th APRIL, 2021.

PRONOUNCED ON: 20th APRIL 2021.

JUDGMENT [PER S. S. SHINDE, J.]:

. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. The Petitioner herein (Convict No. C-10691), is convicted for

the offences under Section 302, 149, 147, 148, 341, 325, 324, 427 of IPC

for life and fine of Rs. 3200/-, in Sessions Case No. 70 of 2008 on

11.05.2016 by the Sessions Court at Mangaon, Dist. Raigad.

Bhagyawant Punde





                                           2/4                           CRWP-1233-2020.doc

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the

petitioner has undergone more than 4 years imprisonment and he is lodged

in the Nashik Road Central prison. It is submitted that the application of the

petitioner to release him on emergency (Covid-19) parole was rejected on

the ground that the Petitioner herein was never released on parole/furlough,

till date. Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits

that, merely because the Petitioner was never released earlier is no ground

to reject his application for emergency (Covid-19) parole.

4. Learned APP appearing for Respondent-State submits that the

prayer of the petitioner to release him on emergency (Covid-19) parole has

rightly been turned down, relying upon the notification dated 8 th May 2020

issued by the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department. It is

submitted that the requisite official capacity to accommodate the convicts in

Nashik Central Prison is 3187 inmates. By end of March 2021, there were

2364 convicts (72- women convicts and 2436 men convicts). It is submitted

that in the Nashik Central Prison 682 more convicts can be accommodated.

In order to prevent spread of Covid-19 virus, inmates/convicts who have

been recently lodged in the said prison are kept in isolation in separate hall

and after necessary health checkup and tests, they are kept in the separate

room in the prison. There is thermal scanning and rapid antigen tests are

conducted on regular basis. In case, anybody is tested positive one separate

Bhagyawant Punde

3/4 CRWP-1233-2020.doc

isolation room No. 8 is maintained for their stay and treatment.

5. We have given careful consideration to the submissions of

learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned APP appearing for

the Respondent-State. With the able assistance of learned counsel appearing

for the Petitioner and learned APP, we have perused the pleadings and

grounds in the petition, annexures thereto, impugned order/letter of

understanding and also report received from the Superintendent of Nashik

Central Prison, Nashik. Upon careful perusal of the said report received from

the prison authority, it clearly appears on record that the proper care is

being taken of the convicts in the prison, so as to, avoid possibility of

contracting Covid-19 virus. However, in the impugned order/letter of

understanding a reason given is that, the Petitioner herein was never

released on furlough/parole, in past.

6. In our opinion, merely because the petitioner was not released

earlier cannot be a ground for rejecting the application of the petitioner for

emergency parole. This Court in Criminal Writ Petition-ASDB-LD-VC No. 65

of 2020 (Milind Ashok Patil & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) had

occasion to consider similar issue and a view is taken in the said case that

merely because the petitioner was not released twice in the past on

parole/furlough cannot be a ground for rejecting the application for

emergency parole.

Bhagyawant Punde





                                            4/4                            CRWP-1233-2020.doc

7. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is partly allowed.

The impugned order dated 15.09.2020 passed by concerned jail authority, is

quashed and set aside. The petitioner is granted liberty to apply afresh for

grant of emergency Covid-19 parole within one week from today. Upon

filing such an application, the respondent authority shall decide the same on

its own merits, as expeditiously as possible, however, within three weeks

from the date of filing of the application in accordance with the Prisions

(Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, and keeping in view the factors

like the extent of spread of Covid-19 virus and conditions in jail.

8. Rule is partly made absolute to above extent. The writ petition

stands disposed of accordingly.

9. We appreciate the able assistance rendered by Advocate

Ms. Bhairavi Ranpise, appointed for representing the petitioner. We quantify

her fess at Rs. 7500/- to be paid by High Court Legal Services Committee,

Mumbai, within four weeks from the receipt of copy of this order.

      ( MANISH PITALE, J.)                                    (S. S. SHINDE, J.)




Bhagyawant Punde