Chaitu Irappa Vadde (In Jail) v. The Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur And Another

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.665 OF 2014 (Chaitu Irappa Vadde vs. The Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur and another) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Mr. A.M. Kukde, Advocate (appointed) for petitioner.

Ms. N. Tripathi, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents.

---------- CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI AND P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATED : FEBRUARY 5, 2015 The petitioner has approached this Court against rejection of his application for parole. The petitioner is undergoing life imprisonment for offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code and for the offence under Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act. The petitioner filed application for parole on 12/5/2014 on the ground of illness of his

2/3 wife.

The concerned Police Authority submitted its report objecting for grant of parole contending that in the event of release of petitioner on parole, there will be possibility of law and order problem. With reference to ground of illness of wife of petitioner, the Police report reveals that second wife of petitioner, namely, Sunita is undergoing treatment at Rural Hospital, Bhamragad. We find that petitioner has not placed on record any document to establish seriousness of illness of his wife. Insofar as apprehension about possibility of law and order problem in the event of release of petitioner on parole is concerned, the respondents have not given any details to fortify their contention. The apprehension appears to be without any basis.

For want of documents about illness of wife of petitioner, the criminal writ petition is liable to be dismissed as even according to Police report, petitioner's wife is taking treatment in the Rural Hospital, Bhamragad. The criminal writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.

3/3 The fee payable to the learned Counsel appointed for the petitioner is quantified as rupees fifteen hundred.

JUDGE JUDGE khj