The petitioner challenged the rejection of his parole application. The Court observed the petitioner was released on furlough. Held that the challenge would not survive as release on furlough substitutes parole for eligibility purposes.
Petitioner directed to apply afresh for parole when eligible in accordance with law.
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.
spb/-
1
wp804-11.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 804 OF 2011
Mr.Raju Kacharu Adangale ... Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. --Through Jail : Mr. K. M. Mhatre, for the Petitioner. Mr. K.V. Saste, APP for the State.
CORAM : P. V. HARDAS & M.N.GILANI,JJ. DATE : 03rd MAY, 2011.
P.C.
1 This petition came to be registered as criminal writ petition on the basis of the communication sent by the petitioner through jail. We had accordingly appointed Advocate, Mr. Mhatre, to represent the petitioner in this petition.
2 A grievance of the petitioner is that the concerned authorities have erroneously rejected his parole application and the appellate authority has erred in law in dismissing his appeal.
3 We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in respect of the challenge to the impugned order. In the meanwhile, the learned APP points out to us that the petitioner came to be released on furlough on 06.04.2011, initially for a period of 14 days and the furlough has been
spb/- 2 wp804-11.sxw
further extended till 04.05.2011. In that light of the matter, therefore, according to us since the petitioner has already been released on furlough, the present challenge to the rejection of his parole leave application would not survive. The petitioner, as and when is eligible, may apply afresh in accordance with law, seeking his release on parole. Rejection of this petition would not come in the way of the of the authority in deciding an application afresh and in accordance with law.
4 In that light of the matter, therefore, this writ petition is dismissed summarily with no order as to costs.
[M.N.GILANI,J.] [P.V. HARDAS, J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the challenge to the rejection of the petitioner's parole application survives when he has already been released on furlough.
Mr. Raju Kacharu Adangale
The State of Maharashtra
P. V. Hardas
M. N. Gilani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
