Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3073 Bom
Judgement Date : 16 February, 2021
Sherla V.
wp.188.2021(R).doc
Digitally
signed by
Vishwanath IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Vishwanath S. Sherla
S. Sherla Date: CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE
2021.02.16
19:51:33
+0530
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.188 OF 2021
Nilesh Ramdhan Gawai ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & another ... Respondents
Mr.Aniket Vagal for the Petitioner
Mr.Deepak Thakare, Public Prosecutor, for Respondent - State
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE &
MANISH PITALE, JJ.
JUDGMENT RESERVED ON: FEBRUARY 11, 2021
JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON: FEBRUARY 16, 2021
JUDGMENT (PER S.S. SHINDE, J.):
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of the
learned Counsel appearing for the parties and heard finally.
2. The Petitioner had applied for grant of emergency Covid-19
parole for 45 days in view of the Covid-19 pandemic and the
amendment in the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules,
1959. However, his application was rejected vide order dated 17 th
September, 2020 passed by Respondent No.2 - Superintendent of
wp.188.2021(R).doc
Jail, Yerwada Open Central Prison, Pune, on the ground that the
petitioner, in the past, during his stay in the jail, had not availed of
parole or fulough leave even once. The petitioner is a convict
undergoing sentence of life imprisonment. The petitioner has been
in jail since last 8 years.
3. Mr.Vagal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner,
relied upon the judgments of this Court in Kalyan s/o.
Bansidharrao Renge vs. The State of Maharashtra & another
(Criminal Writ Petition No.ASDB-LDVC-265 of 2020) and Uzair
@ Hujer s/o. Rafiq Shaikh vs. The State of Maharashtra &
Others (Criminal Writ Petition No.2989 of 2020) to contend that
the ground stated in the impugned order was wholly
unsustainable. It was, therefore, submitted that the Writ Petition
deserves to be allowed.
4. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing
for the State, opposed the petition for grant of emergency Covid-
19 parole. It was submitted that now the situation in the Yerwada
Open Prison, Pune has changed substantially. It was submitted
that the number of inmates in the said prison are less than the
capacity. It was submitted that there is no crowd in the jail and that
wp.188.2021(R).doc
the authorities have sufficient infrastructure now to immediately
take care of any inmate or staff, who may suffer from Covid-19
virus. On this basis, it was submitted that the petitioner could be
permitted to apply afresh for grant of emergency Covid-19 parole.
5. We have perused the record forwarded by the respondents
to the office of the Public Prosecutor of this Court. The facts and
figures stated therein indicate that in pursuance of release of
number of inmates due to Covid-19 pandemic, now the situation in
the Yerwada Open Prison, Pune, has changed substantially.
There can be no doubt about the fact that the petitioner is justified
in relying upon the aforesaid judgments of this Court to claim that
the reason assigned in the impugned order is unsustainable. We
are in agreement with the said contention raised on behalf of the
petitioner and find that the impugned order cannot be sustained.
6. But at the same time, the fact situation on ground as on
today, cannot be ignored and, therefore, there is substance in the
contention raised on behalf of the learned APP that the request of
the petitioner for grant of emergency Covid-19 parole needs to be
considered afresh.
wp.188.2021(R).doc
7. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is partly allowed.
The impugned order 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 No.2 shall decide the same on its own
merits, as expeditiously as possible, however, within two weeks
from the date of such filing of the application in accordance with
the Prisons (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 made absolute to the above extent. The Writ
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(MANISH PITALE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!