The 2MPH government rejected a petition challenging parole eligibility. The State noted the petitioner violated parole by surrendering late and currently held furlough leave. The petitions was dismissed for lack of merit.
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.
18-WP-785-2015.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.785 OF 2015
Shri Mohd. Salim Wali Mohd. Qureshi Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
..Petitioner.
..Respondents.
Ms. Meghna Gowalani i/by Mr. D.V.Kendre, advocates for petitioner. Mr. K.V.Saste, APP for the State.
Coram : RANJIT MORE & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. Date : 8th September, 2015 .
P. C. :
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2 Mr. Saste the learned APP having taken instructions from the concerned officer makes a statement that earlier petitioner was released on parole for a period of 30 days on 24.7.2014. However, he surrendered on 7.10.2014 i.e. late by 44 days. He states that before expiry of one year from the date of surrender, petitioner is not entitled for parol. Mr. Saste also states that yesterday only, petitioner is released on furlough leave. Statements accepted.
Shivgan 1/2
18-WP-785-2015.doc
3 In the light of aforesaid statements, we do not find merit in the petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
[R.G.KETKAR, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]
Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed judgment/order.
Shivgan 2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, already released on furlough and having breached parole conditions, is entitled to any further relief.
Mohd. Salim Wali Mohd. Qureshi
The State of Maharashtra
Ranjit More
R.G. Ketkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
