Allowed

Munna Bhika Manjre, C-3421 v. the State of Mah. Thr. the D.I.G. Prisons (E) (R) Nagpur and 2 Oths

Bombay HC26 Jul 2010WP/312/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner undergoing life imprisonment complained of repeated adverse police reports denying furlough/parole. Court observed petitioner had not misused previous parole granted in WP 548/2009.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to file fresh application for furlough; authorities directed to permit it considering no misuse of prior liberty.

Munna Bhika Manjre, C-3421 Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

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

¶3

Criminal Writ Petition No.312/2010

¶4

[Munna Bhika Manjre .vrs. State of Maharashtra and others]

¶5

................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶6

CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : JULY 26, 2010.

¶7

Heard Mr. S.M. Ghodeswar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. S.S. Wandile, learned APP for the respondents.

¶8

The grievance made by the petitioner, who is undergoing imprisonment for life at Central Prison, Amravati, is that every time the petitioner seeks furlough/parole, adverse police report is sent when called by the competent authority with a view to deny benefit of furlough/parole to the petitioner.

¶9

Reply filed on behalf of the respondents discloses that in the year 2009 the petitioner sought parole which was rejected by the competent authority,

¶10

¶11

against which the petitioner preferred Criminal Writ Petition No.548/2009 which was allowed by this Court and the petitioner was granted parole.

¶12

In the reply filed, it has nowhere been stated that the petitioner had misused the liberty granted to him during the period of parole.

¶13

In view of the above, we permit the petitioner to file fresh application for furlough. In case such an application is filed, the competent authority and concerned police officer shall take into consideration the fact that when the petitioner was released on parole pursuant to order passed by this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.548/2009, the petitioner did not misuse the liberty.

¶14

With these directions, the petition stands disposed of.

¶15

The fees of the learned counsel Mr. S.M. Ghodeswar, who has been appointed to appear on behalf of the petitioner, are quantified at Rs.750/-.

¶16

JUDGE JUDGE

¶17

Gulande

Munna Bhika Manjre, C-3421 v. the State of Mah. Thr. the D.I.G. Prisons (E) (R) Nagpur and 2 Oths

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munna Bhika Manjre, C-3421 v. the State of Mah. Thr. the D.I.G. Prisons (E) (R) Nagpur and 2 Oths

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Namdev S/O Babarao Pachpor and Anor. Vs State of Mah. Thru Pso

Rajkumar Prabhudayal Dajjuka, Convict No. C/127 Vs the State of Mah. Thr. D.I.G. Prison (E) (R) Nagpur and 2 Oths

Smt. Preeti W/O Rajhans Chakole Vs State of Mah. Thr. P.S.I., P.S. Umrer and Oths

Pravin Manohar Sontakke, Convict C-7722 Vs the State of Mah. Thr. D.I.G. Prison (E) (R) Nagpur and 2 Oths

Balkrishna Ishwardas Darwade, Convict No. B-6049 Vs the State of Mah. Thr. the D.I.G. Prisons (E) (R) Nagpur and Anr.

Sarfuddin Jamaluddin Sheikh, Convict No. C-6991 Vs the State of Mah. Thr. the Secy. Home Deptt. and 2 Oths