Dismissed

Salim Umar Vane v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Nov 2004WP/1605/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge criminal writ petition sets aside an order rejecting an application for furlough leave. Relying on an affidavit from the applicant's mother stating her willingness to stand surety, the court directed the prison authorities to reconsider the application.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 13th May 2004 set aside; Respondent No. 2 directed to consider application for furlough leave.

Salim Umar Vane Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2004)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

¶2

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1605 OF 2004

¶4

 Salim Umar Vane ... Applicant

¶5

 versus

¶6

 State of Maharashtra and anr. ... Respondents

¶7

 Mr. Aslam S. Shaikh, for the Applicant.

¶8

 Mr. A.S. Gadkari, A.P.P., for the Respondents.

¶9

 CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.

¶10

 1st November 2004

¶11

 P.C.:

¶12

 . Heard Counsel for the parties. Rule.
 Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Mr.

¶13

 Gadkari, A.P.P., waives notice for the
 Respondents. As short question is involved,
 petition taken up forthwith for final disposal by
 consent.

¶14

 . This petition takes exception to the

¶15

 order passed by the Deputy Inspector-General of
 Prisons, Central Range, Aurangabad, dated 13th

¶16

 May 2004 rejecting the application preferred by
 the Petitioner for release on furlough leave for
 a period of two weeks as per rules. The
 principal reason, indicated for rejection in the
 order is that no person is coming forward to
 stand surety for the Petitioner. To rebut this
 position, Petitioner has stated that his mother
 was willing to stand surety and if it is so, the
 order as passed cannot be sustained. The learned
 A.P.P. on instructions relied on the statement

¶17

 of the Petitioner’s mother wherein she has stated
 that she was not willing to stand surety for the
 Petitioner. Once again, this position has been
 countered by the affidavit of Mrs. Chandbi Umer
 Vanu, mother of the Petitioner, who has
 categorically stated in para 4 thereof that she
 is ready to stand as surety for her son Salim
 Umer Vanu. In view of this, petition succeeds.
 The impugned order dated 13th May 2004 is set
 aside and the Respondent No. 2 is directed to
 consider the application of the Petitioner for
 release on furlough leave in accordance with law.

¶18

 (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.)

Salim Umar Vane v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim Umar Vane v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Abbas Firoz Kanchwala @ Takiwala

Abdul Rehman Abdul Gafoor Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ved Bhushan Batas Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shri Dadasaheb Haridas Parade and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kishanchand Chanchaldas Lund and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohammed Ajaz Merchant S/O. Mohammed Mehboob Merchant Vs the State of Maharashtra