Petitioner sought extension of parole by two years. Court dismissed petition as Rule 25 of Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 limits parole to 90 days, rendering the request without substance.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Criminal Writ Petition No.321/2010
[Mohd. Afzal Shamshouddin .vrs. The State of Maharashtra and another]
................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders
CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : JULY 26, 2010.
Heard Mr. S.M. Ghodeswar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.J. Jichkar, learned APP for the respondents.
By this petition the petitioner seeks extension of parole, which was granted to him, by a period of two years. In terms of Rule 25 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, the maximum period for which parole can be granted is 90 days. Hence, we find no substance in the petition. Hence, the petition stands dismissed.
The fee of the learned counsel Mr. S.M. Ghodeswar, who has been appointed to appear on behalf of the petitioner, are quantified at Rs.750/-.
JUDGE JUDGE
Gulande
1 issue framed by the court
Whether parole can be extended beyond the maximum period of 90 days prescribed by Rule 25 of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohd. Afzal Shamshouddin
The State of Maharashtra
A.P. Lavande
P.D. Kode
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
