Disposed

Kashinath Baban Palkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC2 Apr 2018APPA/473/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought conditional bail in the High Court Criminal Appeal. The Court held it could not grant bail as the underlying appeal had already been dismissed, rendering the Court functus officio. Disposal instructions for parole/furlough were given.

What did the court decide?

Applicant directed to apply for parole/furlough; authorities directed to decide within six weeks with surety not exceeding Rs. 12,000/-

Kashinath Baban Palkar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

6b. cri appa 473-18.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 473 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 944 OF 2009

¶5

Kashinath Baban Palkar

¶6

.. Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

.. Respondent

¶10

Appearances

¶11

Ms. Rohini Dandekar	Advocate (appointed) for the Applicant
Mr. Arfan Sait	APP for the State

¶12

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, Acting C.J. &

¶13

M.S. SONAK, J.

¶14

DATE : APRIL 2, 2018.

¶15

P.C.:

¶16

Heard both sides.

¶17

The prayer of the applicant is that he be released on

¶18

conditional bail / temporary bail for 15 days in order to

¶19

complete the funeral rites i.e "Tervi" of his mother who

¶20

expired on 26.3.2015. The case of the applicant is that he is

¶21

the only son and if the funeral rites i.e "Tervi" are not

¶22

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 3

¶23

6b. cri appa 473-18.doc

¶24

completed within stipulated time, it can be done after three years.

¶25

The applicant has preferred this application in Cri.

¶26

Appeal No. 944 of 2009. The said appeal is preferred by the applicant / appellant against his conviction and sentence under Section 302 of IPC. By Judgment & Order dated

¶27

24.9.2014, the appeal preferred by the applicant came to be dismissed. In view of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed, this Court has become functus officio, hence, it is not possible for us to consider the prayer of the applicant for

¶28

conditional bail / temporary bail for 15 days.

¶29

Advocate Ms. Dandekar submitted that though the applicant cannot be granted conditional bail / temporary bail in view of above facts, the petitioner can be released on

¶30

parole or in the alternative, on furlough.

¶31

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 3

¶32

6b. cri appa 473-18.doc

¶33

In view of the submissions made by Advocate Ms. Dandekar, in case, the petitioner prefers an application for parole or furlough, the same be decided by the Authorities expeditiously and in any event, within six weeks from the

¶34

receipt of the same by the Competent Authority.

¶35

Further, if the Authorities are inclined to grant parole or

¶36

furlough to the petitioner, the surety amount shall not be more than Rs. 12,000/-.

¶37

The application is disposed of in above terms.

¶38

Office to communicate this order to the applicant who

¶39

is in Nasik Road Central Prison, Nasik.

¶40

[ M.S. SONAK, J ] [ ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ]

¶41

jfoanz vkacsjdj

¶42

3 of 3

Kashinath Baban Palkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kashinath Baban Palkar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vaishali Kailas Pawar Alias Vaishali @ Urmila Hari Kale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sharad Shrirang Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sharad Shrirang Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shri. Sachin Sampat Gawali Vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Home Dept. and Ors.

Shri. Kantilal Janardhan Pawar Vs Maharashtra Public Service Commission and Anr.

Mehboob Sahebjade Pirjade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.