The High Court at Aurangabad directed Respondent No.2 to decide the petitioner's pending application for premature release within 10 weeks and disposed of the writ petition.
Respondent No.2 directed to decide the pending application for premature release within 10 weeks from the date of the order.
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 ) crwp1645.23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
929 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1645 OF 2023
RAJU RAMA NAIK VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
Mr.R.A. Jaiswal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.S.N. Morampalle, APP for the respondent/State.
CORAM: R.G. AVACHAT &
KISHORE C. SANT, JJ.
DATED: 01.11.2023
PC :-
01.The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that though the
petitioner has submitted application for his pre-mature release, still same is
not considered by the authorities.
02.Respondent No.2 is directed to decide the application within 10
weeks from today, which is pending since November, 2022.
03. The petition stands disposed off.
[KISHORE C. SANT, J.][R.G. AVACHAT, J.]
snk/2023/NOV23/crwp1645.23
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent authorities are directed to decide the pending application for premature release within a specific timeframe.
Raju Rama Naik
The State of Maharashtra
Another
R.G. Avachat
Kishore C. Sant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court