Anand Gonsalo Fosh (C-5322) vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 1131 Bom

                                   -1-
                                                         criwp1697.20.odt

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1697 OF 2020

Anand s/o Gonsalo Fosh C-5322
age major, occ. Nil
r/o at present Harsul Prison
Tq. Dist. Aurangabad.                                       Petitioner

       Versus

1.     The State of Maharashtra
       Through its Home Department
       Mantralaya, Mumbai

2.     The Superintendent
       of the open prison at Paithan
       Dist. Aurangabad.                                    Respondents

Mrs. S.P. Chate, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. S.J. Salgare, APP for both respondents.

                                 CORAM : T.V. Nalawade &
                                         M.G. Sewlikar, JJ.

DATE : 18th January, 2021.

JUDGMENT : ( Per T.V. Nalawade, J.)

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. By consent, heard both the sides for fnal disposal at

admission stage.

criwp1697.20.odt

3. Order dated 21.04.2020 made by Nasik Road Open

Prison is produced. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

that at present, the petitioner is kept in open prison Paithan. She

submits that the petitioner wants to avail either regular furlough or

emergency parole under Government Notifcation dated 08.05.2020.

She submits that when the petitioner attempted to submit

application for emergency parole, it was not accepted by the prison

authority and when the petitioner is behind bar for more than seven

years for offence of murder, the beneft of Government Notifcation

dated 08.05.2020 is not given to him.

4. If that is so, this Court holds that it is a serious matter.

This Court has already expressed that it is the duty of the

Superintendent of jail to inform all the prisoners that they have right

to apply for emergency parole under Government Notifcation dated

08.05.2020. If that duty is not discharged, this Court may take

serious action against the Superintendent of open prison, Paithan.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

the application of petitioner for emergency parole be accepted and it

the concerned authority be asked to take decision on the application

criwp1697.20.odt

within seven days. In view of this, direction is given that the

application given by the petitioner-prisoner be accepted by informing

him that he should make such application and decision on the

application be taken within seven days from today. If this is not

done by the Superintendent of Jail, further action will be taken by

this Court for contempt of Court.

6. In view of aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed

of. Rule made absolute.

( M. G. SEWLIKAR )                                  ( T.V. NALAWADE )
        Judge                                               Judge

dyb