Partly allowed

Majid Umar Hasid Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC29 Sept 2010WP/2420/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside the rejection of the petitioner's request for furlough leave, noting the police report regarding threats was vague. The authority is directed to reconsider the request within six weeks by imposing suitable conditions, including prohibiting the petitioner from entering the complainants' area.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the rejection of the request for furlough leave; directed the appropriate authority to reconsider the request and impose suitable conditions within six weeks.

Majid Umar Hasid Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2010)

16 wp.2420.10

ndm

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2420 OF 2010

¶6

Majid Umar Hasid Shaikh. ... Petitioner Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra and ors. ... Respondents

¶8

Mrs. A.M.Z. Ansari with Ms. Nasreen Ayubee for the Petitioner. Dr. F.R.Shaikh, APP for the State.

¶9

CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR and P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : 29th September, 2010.

¶10

P.C.

¶11

1 Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned APP.

¶12

2 The only reason for which, request for releasing the Petitioner on furlough leave has been rejected is on account of adverse report of the local police dated 23rd January, 2010. In the said report, it is

¶13

mentioned that the complainant and the witnesses in the case, in which the Petitioner has been convicted, apprehend threat to their life, if the Petitioner was to be released. This is too vague observation made by the local police. In any case, the appropriate authority ought to have recorded its subjective to satisfaction that the apprehension entered by

¶14

¶15

16 wp.2420.10

¶16

the complainant and the witnesses is genuine. Further, nothing prevented the appropriate authority to consider suitable conditions to be imposed so as to ensure that the Petitioner if released on furlough leave, would not indulge in any untoward activity. It was open to the appropriate authority to either restrict the entry of the Petitioner in the area in which the said complainant and the witnesses are ordinarily residing including to require the Petitioner to report to police station on regular basis as may be necessary. These are matters which will have to be considered by the appropriate authority in the first instance.

¶17

3 In the circumstances, we set aside the decision of the appropriate authority and instead direct the appropriate authority to reconsider the request of the Petitioner especially when the Petitioner has stated before us on affidavit that the Petitioner will not enter the area where the complainant and the witnesses are ordinarily residing. This petition is disposed of on the above terms.

¶18

4 We direct the appropriate authority to reconsider the case of the Petitioner on its own merits in accordance with law and impose such condition as may be warranted in the situation, which decision shall, however, be taken not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Majid Umar Hasid Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majid Umar Hasid Shaikh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalavati Sadashiv Dhage Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mahendra Tulsidas Bhutta Vs the Senior Inspector of Police and Ors.

Union of India Vs Mohamed Kunju Mohamed and Ors.

Priyani Prashant Pawar Nee Shobha Ramchandra Kadam Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vishal Subhashsingh Dharadhar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Alok Agarwal S/O Kesarinandan Agarwal Vs the State of Maharashtra