Allowed

Firoj Abdul Ajij Pathan v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC1 Aug 2016WP/2454/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal writ petition, the High Court allowed the extension of parole granted to the petitioner originally for 30 days due to his wife's illness. The court extended the parole period and set aside any punishment for overstay on humanitarian grounds based on medical reports.

What did the court decide?

Period of parole extended and prison punishment for overstay, if any, set aside.

Firoj Abdul Ajij Pathan Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

6. CRI WP 2454-16.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2454 OF 2016

¶5

Firoj Abdul Ajij Pathan .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶6

.. Respondent

¶7

Appearances

¶8

Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner Mrs. U.V. Kejriwal APP for the State

¶9

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &

¶10

MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

¶11

DATE : AUGUST 1, 2016.

¶12

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

¶13

Heard both sides.

¶14

Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶15

The petitioner preferred an application for parole on the

¶16

ground of illness of his wife. By order dated 25.8.2015, the

¶17

State Government granted parole to the petitioner for a

¶18

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 3

¶19

6. CRI WP 2454-16.doc

¶20

period of 30 days. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was released on parole on 16.9.2015 for a period of 30 days. On 24.9.2015, the petitioner preferred first application for extension of parole. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred second application for extension of parole.

¶21

It is an admitted fact that both the applications for

¶22

extension of parole were preferred in time. The extension of parole was sought on the ground that the wife of the petitioner was pregnant and she had fibroids in the uterus. The said applications for extension came to be rejected on the ground that two different illnesses have been stated in relation to wife of the petitioner that is fibroid in uterus and that cesarian operation was necessary., hence, it was felt that the certificate was not genuine.

¶23

The medical certificate shows that the wife of the

¶24

petitioner had both problems that is fibroid in the uterus as well as she was pregnant for which cesarian operation was

¶25

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 3

¶26

6. CRI WP 2454-16.doc

¶27

found necessary. The medical report also shows that the wife of the petitioner was also suffering from anemia. Looking to the fact that the wife of the petitioner was advised operation, we are of the opinion that on humanitarian grounds, the period of parole ought to be extended. It is, accordingly, extended. Prison punishment, if

¶28

any, imposed on account of overstay is set aside.

¶29

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

¶30

Office to communicate this order to the petitioner who

¶31

is in Yerwada Central Prison, Pune.

¶32

Fees to be paid to the appointed Advocate are

¶33

quantified at Rs. 2500/-.

¶34

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

¶35

jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 3

Firoj Abdul Ajij Pathan v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firoj Abdul Ajij Pathan 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

Macchindra Haridas Sakhare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mazhar Maksud Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nitin Shantilal Modha Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sachin Nandu Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dilip Digambar Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vitthal Eknath Adlinge Vs the State of Maharashtra