Bombay High CourtWP/902/2015rejected

Tanaji Vitthalrao Bhosale (In Jail) v. The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati And Another

2015-12-22Hon'Ble Shri Justice B. P. Dharmadhikari,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.M. Deshpande2 pages

wp902.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.902 OF 2015 Tanaji Vitthalrao Bhosale ..vs..

The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati and anr ....................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ....................................................................................................................................................... Mrs. Sunita Paul, counsel for the petitioenr (appointed). Shri J.Y. Ghurde, Addl.P.P. for the State.

CORAM

: B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : DECEMBER 22, 2015.

Heard learned counsel appointed for the petitioner Mrs. Sunita Pual and learned Addl.P.P. for the respondents State.

The report shows that the petitioner was released on parole for treatment of mother and contacted his family only once. The mother is residing with elder brother. The doctor's certificate of mother, are, therefore, totally irrelevant. We also find that during the period of parole leave, it is alleged that the petitioner has indulged in a serious crime under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The reply filed by the State shows that the offence was committed within the .....2/-

wp902.15 jurisdiction of Police Station Wajirabad, District Nanded and the petitioner was in MCR and even today, is in custody in that offence.

According to learned counsel appointed for the petitioner, the involvement of the petitioner in that offence has not been still proved.

The argument is not relevant at this stage.

The petitioner has not reported back within time and currently he is not a free citizen.

In this situation, we find that no case is made out warranting interference. The criminal writ petition is, therefore, rejected.

The fees of learned counsel appointed for the petitioner are fixed at Rs.1,500/-.

JUDGE JUDGE !! BRW !!

...../-