Firoz Muslim Jambura v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

903.WP1359_2016 vidya

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1359 OF 2016 Firoz Muslim Jambura ...

Petitioner vs.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

... Respondents Mr. Daulat G. Khamkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. A.S. Pai, APP for the respondent/State.

CORAM: MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

JUNE 17 , 2016.

ORAL ORDER :(Per Mrs. V.K. Tahilramani, J.) Heard both sides.

2.

Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith. 3.

The petitioner preferred an application for parole on the ground of illness of his wife. The said application came to be granted and the petitioner was released on parole for 30 days, i.e., 17th June, 2015 to 18th July, 2015. On 29th June, 2015, the petitioner preferred an application for extension of his parole by a period of 30 days. The said application came to be granted and the parole period was extended from 18th July, 2015 to 16th August, 2015. Thereafter the petitioner preferred second application for

903.WP1359_2016 extension of parole. The said application is dated 27th July, 2015. In this Application, it was stated that though the operation of his wife was scheduled on 27th July, 2015, the said operation could not take place on account of medical complication and the operation is now rescheduled and it was to take place on 28th August, 2015. Hence, he had preferred an application for extension of parole from 16th August, 2015 for a period of 30 days. The said application came to be rejected. Hence, this Petition. 4.

We have perused the order of rejection of the application for extension of parole dated 28th September, 2015. No reason is mentioned in the said application for rejecting the application for extension of parole which was made by the petitioner. As stated earlier, no reason at all has been assigned by the authorities for rejecting the application of the petitioner for extension of parole. Such an order without reasons cannot be accepted. Hence, we set aside the order and the parole period of the petitioner is extended from 16th August, 2015 by a period of 30 days. Any action been taken on account of overstay of parole by 30 days is set aside. 5.

Rule is made absolute in above terms.

(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.)