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

1987 Supreme(MP) 383

Y.B.SURYAVANSHI
LAIJI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.D.BHARGAVA, Rajendra Tiwari

K. N. SHUKIA, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition has been placed before the Full Bench on a interference by one of us (K. N. Shukla, J.), There have been conflicting decisions about the scope of interference by this Court and numerous cases are being filed by prisoners Under the M. P. Prisonerst Release on Probation Act.

( 2 ) FACTS as stated in the order of reference are as follows. Petitioner is undergoing a sentence of life imprisonment under section 302 IPC. The petitioner has not disclosed the date of the Judgment, the circumstances under which he was prosecuted or the findings on the basis of which be was convicted. The petitioner has merely stated that he had applied for release on probation under section 2 of the M. P. Prisoners Release on Probation Act, 1954 (the Probation Act hereafter) before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court directed the State Government to decide petitioners application within seven months and if the application was not decided within this period the petitioner would be entitled to be released on bail. Petitioners application was not decided within the time allowed by the Supreme Court and he was released on bail. The Probation Board, however, considered the ap













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