Dismissed

Pappu Mallappa Pol (C-5210) v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Jul 2016APPW/289/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order rejected an application to extend parole for an applicant on parole whose wife required surgery. The court found the medical certificate lacked a sonography report and was issued by a homeopathy doctor, not a gynecologist. An application on fixed medical grounds is permitted to be made later.

What did the court decide?

Extension of parole was not granted. Leave to apply again for parole when surgery is fixed is recorded.

Pappu Mallappa Pol (C-5210) Vs State of Maharashtra — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

2.APPW289_2016

¶2

vidya

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 289 OF 2016 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 580 OF 2015

¶6

Pappu @ Popat Mallappa Pol (C-5210)

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

vs.

¶9

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

Mrs. Farhana Shah, Advocate appointed for the applicant. Mrs. U.V. Kejriwal, APP for the respondent/State.

¶12

CORAM: MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

¶13

JULY 5, 2016.

¶14

ORAL ORDER: (Per Mrs. V.K. Tahilramani, J.)

¶15

Heard both sides.

¶16

Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶17

The petitioner was released on parole on 7^th June, 2016 for a period

¶18

of 30 days. Thus, he had to surrender on 8^th July, 2016. The petitioner has preferred this application for extension of parole, as his wife needs surgery. Reliance is placed on certificate of a Homeopathy doctor, who states that

¶19

surgery is necessary. The surgery in question is hysterectomy. There is no

¶20

sonography report or any other report to support the contention that his

¶21

1 of 2

¶22

2.APPW289_2016

¶23

wife requires hysterectomy. His wife is supposed to be suffering from pain

¶24

in the abdomen due to Leucorrhoea. She is also suffering from vomiting of Bile with diarrheoa and weight loss. The doctor has adviced that she needs preoperative treatment such as I.V. Blood transfusion, I.V. Saline's, I.V. Injection's, Tonic, Tablet's etc. for two months and then operation will be done. There are no papers to support the claim that the wife of the petitioner requires I.V. blood transfusion or Saline as adviced by the Homeopathy doctor. This certificate that the wife of the petitioner requires hysterectomy is not issued by a Gynecologist but by Homeopathy doctor. We find that there are no medical investigation papers to support this certificate. In view of this matter, we are not inclined to grant extension of parole. However, as and when the operation of the wife of the petitioner is fixed, it would be open to the petitioner to apply again for parole.

¶25

As stated earlier, at present we are not inclined to grant extension of parole. Hence, Rule is discharged.

¶26

Application is disposed of in above terms.

¶27

(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.)

¶28

2 of 2

Pappu Mallappa Pol (C-5210) v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Mallappa Pol (C-5210) v. State of Maharashtra

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

Rafik Babulal Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Macchindra Haridas Sakhare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nishan Singh Jaimal Singh Sohel Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bhaskar Jagannath Mundhe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Saiban Sagir Ahmed Shaikh and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Manohar Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra