Friday, 01, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Arjun S/Obhanudas Devhare vs State Of Mah. Home Dep. Mantralaya ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 9363 Bom

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 9363 Bom
Judgement Date : 16 July, 2021

Bombay High Court
Arjun S/Obhanudas Devhare vs State Of Mah. Home Dep. Mantralaya ... on 16 July, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar
                                                                         1                    15.Cr.W.P.No.642.2020-J

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

                        CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.642 OF 2020

  Arjun S/o. Bhanudas Devhare (In Jail),
  Aged about 31 years,
  Convict No. C - 4752, Detained in
  Amravati Central Jail Prison, Amaravati.                                          ....PETITIONER


                                      ---- VERSUS ----


  1.       State of Maharashtra
           Home Department, Mantralaya,
           Mumbai.

  2.       Superintendent of Jail,
           Central Prison at Amravati.

  3.       Divisional Commissioner of
           Amravati Division At Amravati.                                           .... RESPONDENTS.
  _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  Shri P. M. Shambharkar, Advocate (Appointed) for the Petitioner.
  Shri S. M. Ghodeswar, A.P.P. for the Respondents/State.
  _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________




                         CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE AND
                                                 AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : 16.07.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT : [PER: AMIT B. BORKAR, J.]

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, the petitioner is challenging order dated 16.09.2020 thereby

imposing condition that the petitioner shall pay police escort

charges while releasing him on emergency parole.

4. The petitioner is convicted for the offences punishable

under Sections 302, 325 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and has

been sentenced of imprisonment for life. The petitioner is

undergoing his sentence at Amravati Central Prison from 2015.

5. The petitioner on 03.09.2020 applied for emergency

parole leave on the ground of death of his father. The Jail Authority

allowed the said application by imposing condition of payment of

police escort charges. The petitioner has therefore challenged the

condition of imposing of police escort charges by way of present

petition.

6. This Court on 18.06.2021 issued notice to the

respondents. The respondent No.2 in pursuance of the notice has

filed reply stating that the police report is adverse to the petitioner.

The police report has revealed that the father of the petitioner had

expired on 13.08.2020. It is further revealed upon police enquiry

that the petitioner was earlier released on leave, but he had not

surrendered to prison on time and therefore, offence under Section

224 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against him. It is also

disclosed by the relatives of the petitioner that after the death of

father of the petitioner, all the ritual regarding of his death have

already been performed. The police report is based on statements of

wife and mother of the petitioner, who have objected for released of

the petitioner.

7. The medical certificate annexed along with reply on

page 24 reveals that the petitioner is suffering from psychosis from

23.02.2017. The reply therefore states that the petitioner is not

entitled for any relief.

8. Shri S. M. Ghodeswar, the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor has relied upon unreported judgment of this Court in

Criminal Writ Petition No.354/2019 in the case of Dilip S/o. Sopan

Pawar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. wherein this Court has

upheld the condition of the payment of police escort charges while a

convict is being released on emergency parole.

9. We have carefully considered the petition and the reply

filed by the respondent No.2. It appears that the death of the father

of the petitioner had occurred on 13.08.2020 and last rites of his

father are already performed by the relatives of the petitioner. Since,

this Court in the Criminal Writ Petition No.354/2019 had already

upheld the condition of imposing of police escort charges, there is

no merit in the petition, the petition is therefore, dismissed.

10. Rule is discharged.

The Advocate for the petitioner being appointed to

represent the petitioner shall be entitled to fees of Rs.1500/- and

expenses of Rs.500/-.

He shall be paid total amount of Rs.2000/- towards his

professional charges.

                                          JUDGE                         JUDGE


RGurnule





 

 
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 : IJJ

 

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

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter