Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Mukesh S/O Poonamchand Patel vs State Of Mha. Thr. Inspector General Of ... on 2 May, 2023

Author: Vinay Joshi

Bench: Vinay Joshi

35cwp125.23.odt                                                                                   1/
2



                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.125 OF 2023
           (Mukesh s/o Poonamchand Patel .vs. State of Maharashtra and others)
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions             Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.

                             Mr. A.Y. Sharma, Advocate for Petitioner,
                             Ms. N.R. Tripathi, APP for Respondents.
                                          ..........

                             CORAM :       VINAY JOSHI AND
                                           BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : 2nd MAY, 2023.

The petitioner has applied for regular furlough leave which has been rejected by respondent no.2 - D.I.G. (East) Prison Nagpur, vide order dated 17.02.2022. The rejection is on two grounds i.e. two offences registered against the surety and some offences against the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the contention about prior offences against the surety is false. In support of said contention, the petitioner has produced the information letter dated 13.04.2022 received under the Right to Information Act. As per the said letter, no offences were registered against the surety namely, Mangalabai.

::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2023 19:13:05 :::

35cwp125.23.odt 2/ 2

3. In view of above, the matter requires reconsideration.

4. In view of that, impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the authority, who in turn, shall re-verify about the pending cases against the surety and pass appropriate order within three weeks from the receipt of this communication.

5. The petition stands disposed in above terms.

(BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.) Gulande ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2023 19:13:05 :::