Rajeshwar Manikrao Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 7115 Bom

Sherla V.


                                                                           31_wp.974.2021-J.doc


                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE

                            CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.974 OF 2021

            Rajeshwar Manikrao Patil                                           ... Petitioner
                              Vs.
            State of Maharashtra & another                               ... Respondents



            Ms.Janhavi Karnik, advocate appointed for the Petitioner

            Mr.Deepak Thakare, Public Prosecutor with Mr.S.R. Shinde, APP,
            for Respondent - State

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

                     JUDGEMENT RESERVED ON: APRIL 29, 2021
                     JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: MAY 4, 2021


            JUDGMENT (PER S.S. SHINDE, J.) :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of the

learned Counsel appearing for the parties and heard finally.

2. The Petitioner has filed the present petition for the following

substantial relief:

"II. Record and proceedings pertaining to impugned order dated 04th June, 2020 passed by the Respondent No.2 be called for and after examining the legality, proprietary (sic)

31_wp.974.2021-J.doc

and validity thereof this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the said Order."

III. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the Application dated 11th September, 2020 and 10th May, 2020 of the Petitioner on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper."

3. The Petitioner herein (Convict No.C-5527), is convicted for

the offences punishable under sections 302 and 309 of the Indian

Penal Code for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in

Sessions Case No.103 of 2004 on 2.8.2005 by the Sessions Court

at Latur.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that

the petitioner has undergone more than 16 years of imprisonment

and he is lodged in the Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik. 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 was released on parole on 21.9.2015, however, he

reported back to the prison late by one day on 23.10.2015.

5. Learned APP appearing for Respondent - State submits that

the prayer of the petitioner to release him on emergency

31_wp.974.2021-J.doc

(Covid-19) parole has rightly been turned down, relying upon the

notification dated 8th May 2020 issued by the Government of

Maharashtra, Home Department. It is submitted that the inmates

are less in number as compared to the capacity of the prison.

Utmost care is being taken in the prison by the officers and

employees working in the prison, by examining the convicts by

thermal scanning and RT-PCR tests. At present, there are no

convicts, who are tested positive/Covid-19 affected in the prison.

Further, she submits that there was a delay by the petition in

reporting back to the prison after being released on parole on

21.9.2015. Therefore, the learned APP submits that the prayer of

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

cannot be considered favourably and the present application be

rejected.

6. We have given careful consideration to the submissions of

the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned APP

appearing for the Respondent - State. With the able assistance

of learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned

APP appearing for the State, we have perused the pleadings and

grounds in the petition, annexures thereto, impugned order / letter

31_wp.974.2021-J.doc

of understanding and also the report received from the

Superintendent of Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik. Upon a

careful perusal of the said report received from the prison

authority, it appears that proper care is being taken of the convicts

in the prison so as to avoid possibility of contracting Covid-19

virus. In the said report, it is stated that when the petitioner was

released earlier on parole leave, he reported late by one day after

completion of the period of the parole leave. However, for the

said late reporting, the prison authority has punished the petitioner

by deducting 5 days remission from the period of his sentence.

7. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is allowed. The

impugned order dated 4.6.2020 passed by Respondent No.2, is

quashed and set aside. The petitioner be released on emergency

Covid-19 parole in accordance with the Prisons (Bombay Furlough

and Parole) Rules, 1959.

8. Rule is made absolute. The writ petition stands disposed of

accordingly.

9. We appreciate the able assistance rendered by Advocate

Ms.Janhavi Karnik, appointed for representing the petitioner. We

31_wp.974.2021-J.doc

quantify her fees at Rs.5,000/- to be paid by High Court Legal

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

a copy of this order.

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