The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad, directed respondent No. 2 to decide the petitioner's parole application expeditiously by 29th October 2016 and disposed of the writ petition.
Directed respondent No. 2 to decide the petitioner's parole application by 29th October 2016.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1418 OF 2016
(Dadasaheb s/o Shankarrao Pathare (Patare) Vs. The State
of Maharashtra and another)
Mr. Mobin Shaikh, Advocate holding for Mr. V.R. Dhorde,
Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S.W. Munde, A.P.P. for the respondent/State
CORAM :S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 27th October, 2016
PER COURT:
Heard.
2. There is an innocuous prayer in this petition
that the respondent No. 2 has not considered the prayer
of the petitioner for releasing him on parole and that
respondent No. 2 be directed to decide the application
filed by the petitioner.
3. We direct respondent No. 2 to decide the
application filed by the petitioner, if already not
decided, as expeditiously as possible; however on or
before 29th October, 2016 and communicate the said
decision to the petitioner. The writ petition is
accordingly disposed of.
criwp1418-2016
2
4.The authenticated copy of this order be
supplied to the petitioner.
5. The learned A.P.P. assures this Court that this
order would be communicated to the concerned authority
immediately.
npj/criwp1418-2016
Dadasaheb s/o Shankarrao Pathare (Patare)
State of Maharashtra
S.S. Shinde
Sangitrao S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court