SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Bom) 650

A.S.OKA, A.S.GADKARI
MOHAMMED MAJID MOHAMMED SHAFI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Farhana Shah, Adv., Deepak Thakare, Adv., P.P. Shinde, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. Oka, J.

On the earlier date, the parties were put to the notice that the Petition will be taken up for the final disposal.

2. In exercise of the powers under Clauses 5 and 28 of Section 59 of the Prisons Act, 1984 (for short, "the Prisons Act"), the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 (for short, "The said Rules of 1959") have been framed.

3. This Bench has dealt with large number of Writ Petitions challenging the Orders of the Competent Authorities as well as the Appellate Authorities refusing to grant either furlough or parole. We have noticed that in most of the cases, the Appeals are disposed of by the Appellate Authority and especially when the Appellate Authority is the State, in a most cryptic manner. We had called upon the learned APP to produce the file in the present case and we had also requested the learned Public Prosecutor to remain present and assist the Court.

4. As far as the Order regarding grant of furlough is concerned, the sanctioning authority as per Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 2 is Deputy Inspector General of Prisons (Regional). An Appeal is provided against refusal to release a prisoner on furlough under Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 2 of the said Ru

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top