Nasir Beg Habib Beg Mirza Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Anr.

On notice being issued to the respondents, the respondents have filed an affidavit-in-reply. In the affidavit-in-reply, the respondents had pointed out that on five occasions, when the petitioner was released on furlough, the petitioner had absconded by 167, 46, 45, 3, 358 and 44 days. The respondents have accordingly placed the petitioner in the category 6(a) of the 1992 Guidelines which provides punishment for 28 years for those prisoners who have escaped from the custody or who have absconded while on parole or furlough.

¶14

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and we have perused the affidavit-in-reply. In the light of the aforesaid

¶15

2

¶16

provision, we cannot fault the respondents for placing the petitioner in Category 6(a) of the 1992 Guidelines. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed summarily with no order as to costs.

¶17

Fees payable to the learned counsel appointed for the petitioner quantified at Rs.1500/-.

¶18

JUDGE JUDGE.

¶19

chute

Nasir Beg Habib Beg Mirza v. the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasir Beg Habib Beg Mirza v. the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Alka Nitin Apradh (Nee More) Vs Director General of Police Mumbai and Others

Dr Sneha Raju Kamble Vs State of Maharashtra Ministry of Home Affairs, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Others

State of Maharashtra through Pso, Reguntha, Gadchiroli Vs Vishwanath Raju Kulmethe

The State of Mah. Thr. Police Station Officer Vs Sukhdeo S/O Mannu Jadhao

Deepak S/O Naresh Prasad Singh Vs State of Mah. Thr. P.S. Warora and Anr.

State of Maharashtra through Police Station Officer Hudkeshwar Nagpur City Vs Avinash Anil Ganer and Others