Dismissed

Dilip Ramchandra Doifode v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Sept 2007WP/1060/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal writ petition, the Bombay High Court dismissed the petitioner's appeal against the rejection of his furlough application. The court held that given the multiple impeachable cases and chapter proceedings pending against him, the order rejecting the furlough application was a fit decision and required no interference.

What did the court decide?

The criminal writ petition was dismissed and disposed of accordingly, with no order passed for the petitioner.

Dilip Ramchandra Doifode Vs the State of Maharashtra — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

 -(1)-

¶2

 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

¶3

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1060 OF 2007

¶6

 [Dilip Ramchandra Doifode. Vs. State.]
 ---------------------------------------------------------------
 Office Notes, office : Court’s or Judge’s orders
 Memoranda of Coram, :
 appearances, Court’s :
 orders or directions :
 and Registrar’s orders :

¶7

 ----------------------------------------------------------------

¶8

 None for the Petitioner.

¶9

 Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for the State.

¶10

CORAM : R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR AND
 SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.

¶11

DATED : SEPTEMBER 07, 2007.

¶12

P.C.:-

¶13

 1. Heard the learned APP for the

¶14

 State. None appeared for the

¶15

 Petitioner.

¶16

 2. The petitioner had preferred an
 application for furlough, which came to
 be rejected on the ground of adverse
 police report. In the police report,

¶17

 -(2)-

¶18

 it is mentioned that there are five
 cognizable cases registered against the
 petitioner. The details of which are
 as under :- (1) C.R.No.77/1988

¶19

 u/sec.302 IPC of Laxmipuri Police

¶20

 Station, (2) C.R.No.87/1995 u/sec.392

¶21

 IPC of Shahupuri Police Station, (3)

¶22

 C.R.No.207/2000 u/secs.143, 147, 148,
 149, 353, 332, 337 IPC of Shahupuri
 Police Station, (4) C.R. No.40/2001
 u/secs.336, 427 IPC, & (5)

¶23

 C.R.No.11/1989 u/sec.392, 324 IPC of

¶24

 Rajarampuri Police Station. In
 addition thereto there are five

¶25

 non-cognizable cases registered against
 the petitioner. Besides these cases,
 there are eight chapter proceedings
 which have been initiated against the
 petitioner.

¶26

 3. Looking to all these facts, we do
 not think that this is a fit case to
 interfere with the order rejecting
 application for furlough preferred by

¶27

 -(3)-

¶28

 the petitioner. Needless to say that

¶29

 if in future the petitioner prefers a
 fresh application for furlough, the
 same shall be decided independently on
 its own merits.

¶30

 4. Writ Petition is disposed of

¶31

 accordingly.

¶32

 5. Jail authorities to communicate

¶33

 this order to the petitioner who is in
 Kolhapur Central Prison.

¶34

 [R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J.]

¶35

 [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]

Dilip Ramchandra Doifode v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Ramchandra Doifode v. the State of Maharashtra

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

Ramija Ayyub Bagwan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sheikh Tamiz Sheikh Peru Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shyamsunder Narsinh Dube and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kamal Dukhiram Jana Vs the State of Maharashtra

Siraj Miya Mustafa Hussain Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sanjeevkumar Mahendra Prasad Roy Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.