Avinash @ Pintya Ashok Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 3435 Bom

           Digitally
           signed by                                   1/3                        CRWP-769-2021.doc
           Vishwanath
Vishwanath S. Sherla
S. Sherla  Date:
           2021.02.23 IN        THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
           12:01:06                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
           +0530

                                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 769 OF 2021

             Avinash @ Pintya Ashok Jadhav
             Age- 39 years, R/o- 20/06, MHADA Colony,
             Mahul Goan, Chembur,
             Mumbai- 400074.                                        ...PETITIONER

                      Versus

             1.       The State of Maharashtra

             2.       The Superintendent of Jail
                      Nashik Road Central Prison                    ...RESPONDENTS
                                                        ...
             Mr. Aniket Vagal for the Petitioner.
             Mrs. S.D. Shinde, APP for State.
                                                        ...

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

RESERVED ON : 18th FEBRUARY, 2021.

PRONOUNCED ON: 23rd FEBRUARY, 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 has filed the present petition for the following

substantial reliefs:

a) Order of Respondent No. 2 passed on 02.05.2020, may kindly be quashed and set aside.

             Bhagyawant Punde
                                           2/3                       CRWP-769-2021.doc

b) The Petitioner may kindly be released on Emergency Parole for the Period of 45 days on any terms and condition as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that, the

petitioner was released once, however, there was delay of 36 days in

reporting back to the jail. It is submitted that the petitioner is in jail for 11

years and therefore, he is entitled to be released on emergency parole.

4. On the other hand, learned APP appearing for Respondent-State

opposed the petition for grant of emergency Covid-19 parole. It was

submitted that the Petitioner had reported late on earlier occasion when he

was released on parole/furlough.

5. We have perused the record forwarded by the respondents to the

office of Public Prosecutor of this Court. The Petitioner was released once in

the past on parole/furlough, however he had reported late to the jail. In our

opinion, merely the petitioner was released once and reported back late to the

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

emergency parole.

Bhagyawant Punde
                                             3/3                          CRWP-769-2021.doc

6. 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 authority shall decide

the same on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible, however, within two

weeks from the date of 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.

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

stands disposed of accordingly.

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




Bhagyawant Punde