← Library
Bombay High CourtCP/123/2018disposed offdismissed for default

Milind Alias Manoj Alias Sharukh Khan Mahadu Thorat (C-7188) Central Prison, Aurangabad v. Sandeep Kamble, Secretary Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai And Another

2018-02-28Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale,Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi3 pages

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMP PETITION NO. 123 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1106 OF 2017 Milind @ Manoj @ Sharukh Khan Mahadu Thorat (C-7188), Central Prison Aurangabad.

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

Sandeep Kamble, Secretary Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

2.

Bapurao s/o Ramrao More, Superintendent Central Prison, Aurangabad.

..RESPONDENTS Mr Rupesh A. Jaiswal, Advocate for petitioner; Mr R.B. Bagul, A.P.P. for respondent/State CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & SMT. VIBHA V. KANKANWADI,JJ.

DATE : 28th FEBRUARY, 2018 ORAL ORDER :

The petitioner is before this Court raising grievance that though the order was passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 12th October, 2017 in Criminal Writ Petition No.1106 of 2017 and thereby the respondents-authorities were

(2) directed to take decision in the matter of premature release of the petitioner by giving him benefit of Government Resolution on account of celebration of Golden Jubilee Independence. Learned Counsel submitted that the respondents - authorities were directed to take a decision within stipulated period of ten weeks.

2.

Learned A.P.P. placed on record the copy of communication of Superintendent, Aurangabad Central Prison. Same is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification.

3.

It is stated that the petitioner is granted benefit of circular and the petitioner is already released from prison on 19th February, 2018. Learned A.P.P. submits that there is some delay in taking decision and delay is purely unintentional and bonafide reason. An apology is tendered on behalf of respondents-authorities for delay.

(3) 4.

In view of communication and in view of the fact that the petitioner is already released from the prison, the order passed by this Court is complied with and by accepting apology, we dispose of the petition.

(SMT. VIBHA V. KANKANWADI) (PRASANNA B. VARALE) JUDGE JUDGE Tupe