Rafiq Alam Parmar vs State Of Gujarat
2022 Latest Caselaw 10021 Guj

     R/SCR.A/12965/2022                         ORDER DATED: 13/12/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

          R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 12965 of 2022

==========================================================
                          RAFIQ ALAM PARMAR
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
PIYUSHKUMAR K BASERI(7933) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MR HARDIK MEHTA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                            Date : 13/12/2022

                             ORAL ORDER

1. Mr. Piyushkumar K.Baseri, learned advocate for

the applicant submits that, the present applicant has

made a prayer for long parole leave, contending that

Activa Scooter of the ownership of the petitioner was

stolen and he had filed a Consumer Complaint No.55 of

2019 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal

Commission, Ahmedabad.

2. According to Mr. Baseri, the respondents to the

matter till today has not paid compensation money to the

applicant. Mr. Baseri relied on paragraph-40 of the

R/SCR.A/12965/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2022

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of State

of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Jagdish, rendered in Criminal

Appeal No.566 of 2010. Mr. Baseri has also relied upon

circular of Government of Gujarat, Home Department,

which is directions for decision in furlough and parole

applications and circular of I.G. Prison dated 26.04.2017

directing the competent authority to take decision timely

on the parole and furlough leave of the inmates.

3. The jail remarks have been produced on record

by learned APP to submit that, the present applicant is

facing about 18 jail punishment and though instructed to

report in time after the leave, has not adhered to the

direction. Learned APP submits that there is no reason to

grant long parole leave just for the purpose of execution

of the consumer order, since the complainant in the

redressal forum is the brother of the applicant and

therein the order is made to grant Rs.3,000/- as

compensation within 30 days of the order, which was

passed on 21.10.2022. Mr. Mehta, learned APP, submits

R/SCR.A/12965/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2022

that the brother of the applicant can always move

Execution Petition and for that purpose no long parole

leave can be granted.

4. Having considered the jail remarks and the

order passed by the District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad in Consumer

Complaint No.55 of 2019. The order has been passed

against the opponents to pay the applicant 75% of the

amount, which comes to Rs.40,261/-, by account payee

cheque at 8% interest and compensation money of

Rs.3,000/- and a cost of Rs.2,000/-, the brother of the

complainant can file an Execution Petition for recovery of

the money. This Court does not consider the same as a

ground for granting long parole leave. Hence, the present

application stands rejected.

(GITA GOPI,J) Pankaj