The High Court rejected a Criminal Writ Petition challenging the Prison Deputy Inspector General's discretion over the petitioner's habitual late reporting. The Court held the conduct did not warrant interference in the extraordinary jurisdiction.
Writ Petition rejected.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No. 202 of 2016 [Chandraprakash Jairam Sharma (in jail) Vs. D.I.G. Prison (E), Nagpur, & another]
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Mr. Mir Nagman Ali, Adv., for the petitioner. Mrs. Geeta Tiwari, APP for respondents.
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 29th June, 2016
Heard.
Taking into consideration the past conduct of the petitioner of habitually reporting late, we do not find that it can be said that the discretion exercised by the authority has been exercised in a perverse manner, to warrant any interference by this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction.
Writ Petition No. 202 of 2016 is rejected .
Judge Judge
| hedau |
2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere in the administrative discretion exercised by the prison authority regarding the petitioner's habitual late reporting.
Whether the petitioner's past conduct of habitually reporting late establishes a perverse exercise of discretion warranting this Court's extraordinary jurisdiction.
Chandraprakash Jairam Sharma
D.I.G. Prison (E), Nagpur
B. R. GAVAI
V.M. DESHPANDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
