Rahul Rajkumar Shingade vs The Superintendent, Central ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3876 Bom

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3876 Bom
Judgement Date : 11 April, 2022

Bombay High Court

Rahul Rajkumar Shingade vs The Superintendent, Central ... on 11 April, 2022

Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar

                                                   1                     crwp674.21.odt


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

              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 674 OF 2021


     Rahul Rajkumar Shingade
     (C/9670, Central Prison, Nagpur,
     District Nagpur)
                                                               ... PETITIONER

           ---VERSUS---

     The Superintendent,
     Central Prison, Nagpur, District Nagpur.
                                                               ...RESPONDENT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S.D. Chande, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri M.K. Pathan, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE AND
                     AMIT BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : 11th APRIL, 2022.

JUDGMENT : (PER - AMIT BORKAR, J.)

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India the petitioner is challenging the order dated

04.06.2021 refusing the release of the petitioner on emergency

parole under Rule 19(1)(ii) of the Maharashtra Prisons (Mumbai

Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959.

2 crwp674.21.odt

4. Shri Chande, learned counsel appearing for the petioner

fairly submitted that the petitioner has convicted for the offence

under the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act (POCSO), which is special act. In view of said

statement, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the

authoritative pronouncement of Full Bench of this Court in the

case of Pintu Uttam Sonale Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in

2020 (6) Mh.L.J. 627,.

5. In that view the fact that the issue is covered by the

decision of Full Bench there is no illegality in exercise of power by

the respondent. There is no merit in the petition. The petition is,

therefore, dismissed.

Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any,

stand(s) disposed of.

                                             JUDGE                                      JUDGE
                Wagh




Signed By:SURESH RAOSAHEB
WAGH
Personal Assistant
to the Hon'ble Judge
Signing Date:13.04.2022 18:14