Petitioner, a prisoner on parole for house repairs, sought extension. The High Court discharged the petition, finding the grounds pleaded insufficient to establish a case for prolonging the parole period.
Petition rejected; no extension of parole granted.
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.656 OF 2010.
MUKESH WAMAN BANSOD
VS.
THE DIG PRISON (E)(R) NAGPUR AND ANOTHER
______________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
By post.
Smt. B. P. Maldhure, APP, APP for State respondent.
CORAM: A.H. JOSHI AND
A.R. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE: 15th DECEMBER 2010.
1.This is a letter petition.
2.Admittedly, he was granted parole for
repairs of his house for 30 days which duration has
been extended once by the same spell.
3.We are not convinced on the grounds
pleaded by the petitioner that he has made out a
case for extension of parole prayed for by him.
4. The petition is rejected.
5.Copy of this order be sent to the
2
Superintendent of Jail, Central Prison, Nagpur who
shall interpret and explain the contents to the
prisoner.
Judge
Judge
//mule//
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to an extension of parole granted for house repairs.
Mukesh Waman Bansod
The DIG Prison (E)(R) Nagpur
A.H. Joshi
A.R. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court