Tukaram Vithal Jadhav vs State Of Mha. Thr. Superintendent ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17984 Bom

                                                   1                     crwp799.21.odt


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.799 OF 2021
     Shri Tukaram Vithal Jadhav,
     Aged major, Occ: Nil.
     (C-5340 - Presently at Central Prison
     Amravati)                                                        ...PETITIONER

                                   ...V E R S U S...
1. State of Maharashtra,
   Through Superintendent of Jail,
   Central Jail, Amravati.

2. Divisional Commissioner,
   Amravati Division, Armavati.

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Prison,
     Eastern Region, Nagpur.                                     ...RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Raju Kadu, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri S.M. Ghodeswar, A.P.P. for respondents.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         CORAM:- M.S. SONAK AND PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.

DATE :- 23rd DECEMBER, 2021

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER: M.S. SONAK, J.)

Rule. Rule is returnable forthwith. Heard finally with

the consent of learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the

sides.

2. For the reasons which we have set out in our

judgment and order dated 21.12.2021 disposing of Criminal Writ

Petition No.800 of 2021 (Dilip s/o Vishnu Pawar Vs. State of

Maharashtra and others), we set aside the impugned order

dated 04.06.2021 made in the present case and remand the

matter to the concerned authority (respondent no.1) for fresh 2 crwp799.21.odt

consideration of application of the petitioner in accordance with

law and in the light of observations that we have made in our

judgment and order dated 21.12.2021 disposing of Criminal Writ

Petition No.800 of 2021.

3. The petitioner's application will have to be decided

expeditiously and in any case within two weeks from the date of

communication of this order. Further, we make it clear that the

petitioner's application will have to be decided based on the

situation prevailing on the date of which the said application was

made.

The Rule is made absolute. There shall be no order

for costs.

(Pushpa V. Ganediwala, J.) (M.S. Sonak, J.)

Wagh

Signed By:SURESH RAOSAHEB WAGH Personal Assistant to the Hon'ble Judge Signing Date:23.12.2021 18:24