Allowed

Rakaesh @ Pintya Ramesh Rane v. the Superintendent and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Sept 2016WP/3036/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal convict filed a writ petition seeking parole on medical grounds for his brother. The High Court examined the petitioner's past furlough and parole conduct, finding no complaints against him or threats to witnesses, and set aside previous rejections to grant parole.

What did the court decide?

Parole granted to the petitioner on the usual terms and conditions set out by the Jail Authorities, orders dated 12.2.2016 and 26.7.2016 set aside.

Rakaesh @ Pintya Ramesh Rane Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

2. CRI WP 3036-16.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3036 OF 2016

¶5

Rakesh @ Pintya Ramesh Rane

.. Petitioner

Versus

The Superintendent,

Kolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba & Ors. .. Respondents

¶10

Appearances

¶11

Mr. B.G. Tangsali i/by
Mr. Santosh Musale	Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. H.J. Dedia	APP for the State

¶12

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &

¶13

MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

¶14

DATE : SEPTEMBER 8, 2016.

¶15

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

¶16

Heard both sides.

¶17

Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶18

The petitioner preferred an application for parole on

¶19

14.12.2015 on the ground of illness of his brother. The said

¶20

application came to be rejected by order dated 12.2.2016.

¶21

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 4

¶22

2. CRI WP 3036-16.doc

¶23

Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal.

¶24

The appeal came to be dismissed by order dated 26.7.2016.

¶25

The application of the petitioner came to be rejected on

¶26

the ground that there is danger to the life of the witnesses and the families of the witnesses. This is a sole ground on which the application of the petitioner for parole came to be rejected.

¶27

It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was released on furlough on 23.9.2013. He surrendered back to the prison on the due date. Thereafter on 31.8.2015, the petitioner was released on furlough. He surrendered back to the prison on his own but there was delay of one day. On 31.10.2014, the petitioner was released on parole. He surrendered back on the due date to the prison. During all the three occasions that the petitioner was released on furlough and parole, no record has been pointed out to us to

¶28

show that there was any complaint by any of the witnesses

¶29

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 4

¶30

2. CRI WP 3036-16.doc

¶31

that there was threat to them by the petitioner. Similarly, no record has been pointed out to us that any untoward incident took place during the period that the petitioner was released on furlough or parole. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that there was no objective material before the Authorities to come to the conclusion that if the petitioner is released on parole, there would be danger to the life of the witnesses or their family members. Moreover, the police report shows that the surety is found suitable and competent and it is also stated in the police report that the brother of the petitioner is suffering from the problem of spinal cord for which he has been advised operation.

¶32

Looking to the above facts, we are inclined to grant

¶33

parole to the petitioner, hence, the orders dated 12.2.2016 and 26.7.2016 are set aside. The petitioner be released on

¶34

parole on the usual terms and conditions as set out by the Jail Authorities.

¶35

jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 4

¶36

2. CRI WP 3036-16.doc

¶37

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

¶38

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

¶39

jfoanz vkacsjdj 4 of 4

Rakaesh @ Pintya Ramesh Rane v. the Superintendent and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakaesh @ Pintya Ramesh Rane v. the Superintendent and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ismail Yusuf Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Asif Yusuf Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Aazar Azim Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ganpat Bhikaji Bamne Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sunil Devnarayan Singh @ Papa Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shilpa Yogesh Ingale Vs the State of Maharashtra