Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Chandrakant Naryan Kamble C-9029 vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 9165 Bom

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 9165 Bom
Judgement Date : 14 July, 2021

Bombay High Court
Chandrakant Naryan Kamble C-9029 vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 14 July, 2021
Bench: V.K. Jadhav, S. G. Dige
                                         1                           958-CriWP-701-21.odt



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                   CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 701 OF 2021

Chandrakant S/o Narayan Kamble, C-9029
Age: 53 years, Occupation Nil.,
R/o: At present Paithan Open Prison,
District Aurangabad                                         ..       Petitioner

                 Versus

1.       The State of Maharashtra
         Through its Home Department
         Mantryala Mumbai

2.       The Superintendent of the Open Prison
         at Paithan, District Aurangabad                    ..       Respondents

                                     ...
Mrs. Sharada P. Chate, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. S. J. Salgare, APP for respondents - State
                                    ...

                                             CORAM :        V. K. JADHAV AND
                                                            S. G. DIGE, JJ.

                                             DATE     :     14th JULY, 2021


JUDGMENT ( PER : S. G. Dige, J. ) :-


1.               Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard

finally at admission stage.


2.               By this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order

dated 2nd March 2021, passed by respondent No. 2 - the Superintendent,

Open Prison at Paithan, District Aurangabad, by which the emergency

parole is refused to the petitioner.



::: Uploaded on - 17/07/2021                        ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2021 07:25:18 :::
                                         2                        958-CriWP-701-21.odt



3.               The petitioner had filed an application for emergency parole

under Government Notification, dated 8 th May 2020.                       The said

application came to be rejected by respondent No. 2 on the ground that

the petitioner is not entitled to release on emergency parole, wherein, he

had not availed leave on two occasions, he had not availed single leave,

and further the reason for not granting parole application is that

shortage of prisoners as the most of them are on leave.


4.               Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order

passed by respondent No. 2 is unreasonable, absurd and also against

Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 21 (right to life liberty) of the

Constitution of India. The petitioner is eligible for emergency parole

leave as per Government Notification, dated 8 th May 2020. But, without

considering this fact, respondent No.2 rejected the same, hence, it is

necessary to quash and set aside the impugned order.


5.               Learned APP appearing for the respondents-authorities

submits that the order passed by the respondent-authority is reasonable

and as per Government Notification, dated 8th May 2020.


6.               The petitioner has been convicted for the offences

punishable under Sections 304 Part-II and 506 of the Indian Penal Code

(for short, "IPC") vide Judgment and order passed by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Ahemadpur, District Latur, dated 17 th June



::: Uploaded on - 17/07/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2021 07:25:18 :::
                                        3                         958-CriWP-701-21.odt



2016 and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for ten years under

Section 304 Part-II of IPC and two years for the offene punishable under

Section 506 of IPC. He has undergone more than six years sentence at

Paithan Open Prison, Paithan, District Aurangabad.


7.               The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kavita w/o

Dilip Baviskar Versus State of Maharashtra, in Criminal Writ Petition

No. 571 of 2020, decided on 30-06-2020 has interpreted the condition

given in the aforesaid notification. This Court has held that the prisoner

had not availed furlough or parole in the past cannot come in his way if

he was otherwise eligible during that period to get furlough or parole.

In view of this interpretation, this Court holds that the order passed by

respondent No. 2 cannot sustain in law. In the result, following order is

passed.

                                   ORDER

(i) The Criminal Writ Petition is allowed.

(ii) The order dated 2nd March 2021 passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting emergency parole is hereby quashed and set aside.

(iii) The application filed by the petitioner for emergency parole under Government Notification, dated 8th May 2020 is hereby allowed.

(iv) The petitioner be released on emergency parole on usual terms and conditions within seven days from the date of this order.

(v) Rule made absolute in the above terms.

(vi) Authenticated copy of the order is allowed to both sides.

        ( S. G. DIGE )                          ( V. K. JADHAV )
            JUDGE                                     JUDGE
mtk




 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter