Virendra Motilal Rahore vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Superintendent, Central Prison, Nagpur and Anr.

¶1

2026:BHC-NAG:7471-DB

¶2

32.wp.400.2026.Judgment.odt

¶3

( 1 )

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 400 OF 2026

¶6

Virendra Motilal Rahore, Aged 67 Years, R/o. Kunjilalpeth Rameshwari Road post, Bhagwan Nagar, Nagpur, Occupation - Private Business. .... PETITIONER

¶7

// VERSUS //

¶8

State of Maharashtra through the Superintendent, Central Prison, Nagpur.

¶9

The DIG Prisons (East Division), Nagpur .... RESPONDENTS

¶10

- - - - Mr. S. D. Sahoo, Advocate for petitioner. Ms. N. R. Tripathi, APP for State.

¶11

¶12

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ. DATED : 09/06/2026

¶13

ORAL JUDGMENT : [Per : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.]

¶14

Heard.

¶15

Rule . Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

It is the contention of the petitioner that his son

¶17

Ashish Virendra Rathore is convicted and undergoing life imprisonment at Central Prison, Nagpur in an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has already undergone

¶18

more than 11 years of imprisonment and is seeking for extension

¶19

( 2 )

¶20

32.wp.400.2026.Judgment.odt

¶21

of regular parole leave. The said request was considered by the respondents and he was extended with the regular parole leave by order passed by respondent No.2 on 09.04.2026. During the parole period, he suffered heatstroke and was admitted in the hospital. As per the medical advice, he needs continuous attention and rest for more 15 days. He was directed to surrender by 10.06.2026, and therefore, he has approached this Court.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. He reiterated the said contentions and submitted that considering the physical condition of the petitioner’s son which is unstable and has been hospitalized, it would not be possible for him to surrender before the prison on due date. Therefore, he prayed that the period of parole be extended by two weeks.

¶23

Learned APP filed her reply and strongly opposed the said contentions. She invited our attention towards the Notification issued by the Home Department dated 02.12.2024, especially Rule No.18. It speaks about the extension of parole and it states that parole shall not be extended beyond the sanctioned period under any circumstances. She submitted that in view of that, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶24

On hearing both sides and on perusal of the documents, there is no dispute that the son of the present petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section

¶25

32.wp.400.2026.Judgment.odt

¶26

( 3 )

¶27

302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. He was extended with the concession of regular parole by order of respondent No.2 dated 09.04.2026. During the parole period, he suffered heatstroke. The medical certificate which is placed on record, issued by Venus Polyclinic shows that he needs continuous hospitality and made a medical care for at least 15 days. He is weak and not able to walk and move. Thus, the contention of the convict and the petitioner is supported by the medical certificate. Admittedly, the rule states that the parole shall not be extended beyond the sanctioned period under any circumstances, however, considering the medical condition of the prisoner and now he has already undergone the hospitalization of 9 days, the petition deserves to be allowed partly. Accordingly, we proceed to pass following order:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed partly . (ii) The extension of one week was granted to the son of the present petitioner to surrender before the Superintendent of Central Prison, Nagpur.

¶30

(iii) On violation of this condition, the Superintendent of Central Prison, Nagpur, is at liberty to take appropriate action against the present petitioner.

¶31

Rule accordingly.

¶32

(NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J)

¶33

Signed by: Mr. A.R. Sarkate Sarkate. Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 10/06/2026 15:33:59

Virendra Motilal Rahore v. State of Maharashtra Thr the Superintendent, Central Prison, Nagpur and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Motilal Rahore v. State of Maharashtra Thr the Superintendent, Central Prison, Nagpur and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Kps Energy Solutions LLP Thr Mr. Jayshih Jaymalbhai Rathod vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Officer in Charge of Cyber Police Station Sadar Nagpur City

Ganesh Devidas Shinde (C-6117) vs Deputy Inspector General Prison, (East Region), Nagpur.

Santosh S/O Tulshiram Chavhan vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Home Secretary, Home Department.

Akash Urf Karan Vinod Thunkekar vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary Home Department (Special) Mantralaya Mumbai

Indumati Wd/O Narayanrao Turaskar vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary

Firoz Kazi @ Bali Zahiruddin Kazi vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretar Y Home Department Special Mantralaya Mumbai