Bombay High Court
Sitaram S/O Vasant Sawant vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 6 May, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
Judgment 1 wp344.21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 344/2021
Sitaram S/o Vasant Sawant,
C-5339, Aged about 26 years,
Occ. Nil, R/o. Baitwadi, Post: Kolad,
Tah. Roha, Dist. Raigadh,
(Presently in Central Prison, Amravati)
.... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1] State of Maharashtra,
Through Superintendent of Jail,
Central Jail, Amravati
2] Divisional Commissioner,
Amravati Division, Amravati
3] The Deputy Inspector General Of Prison,
Eastern Region, Nagpur
.... RESPONDENT(S)
*******************************************************************
Shri Raju Kadu, Advocate for the petitioner
Ms. N.R. Tripathi, APP for the respondents
*******************************************************************
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
MAY 06, 2021
JUDGMENT : (PER:- AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)
1] Heard.
2] RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.
ANSARI
Judgment 2 wp344.21.odt
3] By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02/10/2020 passed by
the respondent no. 1 rejecting the application for grant of emergency parole
under Rule 19(1)(C) of the Maharashtra Prisons (Bombay Furlough and
Parole) Rules, 1959 (for short "the said Rules"). The petitioner was convicted
under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and was directed to suffer
rigorous imprisonment of 10 years. The petitioner had undergone sentence of
4 years on the date of filing of the application. The petitioner on 28/09/2020
filed an application for grant of emergency parole as contemplated by Rule
19(1)(C) of the said Rules. The respondent no. 1 by the impugned order
rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of emergency parole.
4] The petitioner has therefore challenged the order dated
02/10/2020 by filing the present petition. On reading of the impugned order,
it appears that the application for release of the petitioner on emergency
parole under Rule 19(1)(C) of the said Rules has been rejected on the ground
that the petitioner was not released two times before filing of the application.
The issue involved in the present petition is no longer res-integra in view of
the judgment of this Court in LD-VC Criminal Writ Petition No. 345/2020
(Imtiaz Usman Memon vs. State of Maharashtra & anr. ) and in LD-VC
Criminal Writ Petition No. 370/2020 ( Manishprasad Narsingh Gaud vs. State
of Maharashtra & anr.) wherein the Division Bench of this Court has held that
the emergency parole application cannot be rejected on the ground that the
petitioner was not released twice on the earlier occasions. The petitioner has
stated that last time when the petitioner was released on parole, he
ANSARI
Judgment 3 wp344.21.odt
surrendered himself before due date and there is no single complaint against
the petitioner. It is further stated that the petitioner has not misused the
liberty granted by the Authority while on parole leave. We are therefore of
the view that the respondent no. 1 was not justified in rejecting the
application of the petitioner for grant of emergency parole.
5] Hence, the following order:-
(a) The impugned order dated 02/10/2020 passed by
the respondent no. 1 rejecting the application of the petitioner
for emergency parole leave is quashed and set aside.
(b) The respondent no. 2 is directed to release the
petitioner on emergency parole till the declaration of epidemic
under the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 is in force, on such terms
and conditions as the respondent no. 1 deems fit and proper.
(c) The petitioner shall scrupulously abide by all the
conditions imposed by the respondent no. 1 for ensuring that he
surrenders on or before the due date at prison.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
(JUDGE) (JUDGE)
ANSARI
