Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Aabidali Kadarali Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 7026 Bom

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 7026 Bom
Judgement Date : 4 May, 2021

Bombay High Court
Aabidali Kadarali Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra on 4 May, 2021
Bench: S.S. Shinde, Manish Pitale
                                              1/5                           WP-528-2021.doc




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 528 OF 2021

Aabidali Kadarali Shaikh
(In Nashik Central Jail)                                        ...Petitioner

         Versus

The State of Maharashtra                                ...Respondent
                               ...
Mr. Advait M Sethna appointed advocate a/w. Mr. Raju Thakker Mr.
Tanay Nandot, Mr. Pranav Gohil for Petitioner.
Mr. Deepak Thakre, PP a/w. Mr. S.R. Shinde, APP for Respondent-
State.
                               ...
                       CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
                                   MANISH PITALE, JJ.

RESERVED ON: 29th APRIL, 2021.

PRONOUNCED ON: 4th MAY, 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 writ petition for the

following substantial relief:

a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the records and proceedings and on perusal thereof, quash and or set aside the Impugned Rejection Letter/Letter of Understanding dated 19th September, 2020;

b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an Order directing the Superintendent of Nasik

Bhagyawant Punde

2/5 WP-528-2021.doc

Road Central Prison, Nasik to release the Petitioner herein on Covid-19 Emergency Parole Leave for 45 days on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the present facts and circumstances and oblige;

3. The Petitioner (Convict No. C-11680), is convicted for the

offences under Section 302 of IPC for life and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in

Sessions Case No. 865 of 2014 on 13.04.2018 by the Sessions

Court at Mumbai.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits

that the petitioner has undergone more than 6 years imprisonment

and he is lodged in the Nashik Road Central prison. It is submitted

that the application of the petitioner to release him on emergency

(Covid-19) parole was rejected on the ground that the Petitioner

herein was never released on parole/furlough, till date. Therefore,

learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that, merely

because the Petitioner was never released earlier is no ground to

reject his application for emergency (Covid-19) parole.

5. Learned PP appearing for Respondent-State submits that

the prayer of the petitioner to release him on emergency (Covid-19)

parole has rightly been turned down, relying upon the notification

dated 8th May 2020 issued by the Government of Maharashtra,

Bhagyawant Punde

3/5 WP-528-2021.doc

Home Department. It is submitted that the requisite official capacity

to accommodate the convicts in Nashik Central Prison is 3178

inmates. By end of March 2021, there were 2364 convicts (68-

women convicts and 2243 men convicts). It is submitted that in the

Nashik Central Prison 807 more convicts can be accommodated. In

order to prevent spread of Covid-19 virus, inmates/convicts who

have been recently lodged in the said prison are kept in isolation in

separate hall and after necessary health checkup and tests, they are

kept in the separate room in the prison. There is thermal scanning

and rapid antigen tests are conducted on regular basis. In case,

anybody is tested positive one separate isolation room No. 8 is

maintained for their stay and treatment.

6. We have given careful consideration to the submissions

of learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned PP

appearing for the Respondent-State. With the able assistance of

learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned PP, we

have perused the pleadings and grounds in the petition, annexures

thereto, impugned order/letter of understanding and also report

received from the Superintendent of Nashik Central Prison, Nashik.

Upon careful perusal of the said report received from the prison

authority, it clearly appears on record that the proper care is being

taken of the convicts in the prison, so as to, avoid possibility of

Bhagyawant Punde

4/5 WP-528-2021.doc

contracting Covid-19 virus. However, in the impugned order/letter

of understanding a reason given is that, the Petitioner herein was

never released on furlough/parole, in past.

7. In our opinion, merely because the petitioner was not

released earlier cannot be a ground for rejecting the application of

the petitioner for emergency parole. This Court in Criminal Writ

Petition-ASDB-LD-VC No. 65 of 2020 (Milind Ashok Patil & Ors. Vs.

State of Maharashtra & Ors.) had occasion to consider similar issue

and a view is taken in the said case that merely because the

petitioner was not released twice in the past on parole/furlough

cannot be a ground for rejecting the application for emergency

parole.

8. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is partly

allowed. The impugned order dated 19.09.2020 passed by

Respondent-authority, 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 Prisions

Bhagyawant Punde

5/5 WP-528-2021.doc

(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.

9. Rule is partly made absolute to above extent. The writ

petition stands disposed of accordingly.

10. We appreciate the able assistance rendered by Advocate

Mr. Advait Sethna, appointed for representing the petitioner. We

quantify his fees at Rs. 5000/- to be paid by High Court Legal

Services Committee, Mumbai, within four weeks from the receipt of

copy of this order.

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




Bhagyawant Punde





 

 
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