Dismissed

Shekhar Chandrakant Nadkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC28 Jun 2016WP/1979/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal writ petition, the petitioner sought a permanent transfer from Kolhapur Central Prison to Taloja Central Prison to visit his relatives. The High Court upheld the prison authorities' rejection of the transfer request on security grounds and discharged the rule.

What did the court decide?

Rule discharged; transfer application rejected on security grounds.

Shekhar Chandrakant Nadkar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

9a. cri wp 1979-14.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1979 OF 2014

¶5

Shekhar Chandrakant Nadkar

¶6

.. Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

.. Respondent

¶10

Appearances

¶11

Mrs. Rupali Manik Shinde	Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner
Mrs. A.S. Pai	APP for the State

¶12

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &

¶13

MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

¶14

DATE : JUNE 28, 2016.

¶15

ORAL ORDER [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

¶16

Heard both sides.

¶17

Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶18

The prayer of the petitioner is that he be transferred

¶19

from Kolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba to Taloja Central

¶20

Prison, Navi Mumbai.

¶21

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 3

¶22

9a. cri wp 1979-14.doc

¶23

The learned APP has tendered the affidavit of Ms. Swati

¶24

Sathe, Dy. Inspector General of Prisons, Western Region, Pune. In the said affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner has requested for transfer from Kolhapur Central Prison to Taloja Central Prison as his relatives are residing at Mangaon, District Raigad and Taloja Central Prison is about 92-95 kilometers away from the residence of his relatives. It is stated that considering the request of the petitioner, the Dy. Inspector General of Prisons passed an order whereby for a period of one month, the petitioner was transferred from Kolhapur Central Prison to Taloja Central Prison. i.e from 8.3.2014 to 6.4.2014 in order to enable him to meet his relatives. Thereafter, the petitioner was brought back to Kolhapur Central Prison.

¶25

It is further stated that the Dy. Inspector General of Prisons rejected the request of the petitioner to permanently transfer him from Kolhapur Central Prison to Taloja Central Prison for security reasons. The Dy. Inspector General of

¶26

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 3

¶27

9a. cri wp 1979-14.doc

¶28

Prisons is the best person to consider the security aspect which has been done in the present case. Looking to the reasons stated by the Dy. Inspector General of Prisons, it cannot be said that the order is arbitrary or suffers from any malafides. In this view of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere, hence, Rule is discharged.

¶29

[ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]

¶30

jfoanz vkacsjdj

¶31

3 of 3

Shekhar Chandrakant Nadkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shekhar Chandrakant Nadkar v. the 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

Satish Raghunath Devkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Satish Raghunath Devkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pradumna Balgonda Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sameer Gulam Hussain Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Ramchandra Haldankar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gajanan Khandu Tiwade Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.