Bombay High Court
Yogesh @ Charu Ananda Chandane vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 15 July, 2025
Author: A. S. Gadkari
Bench: A. S. Gadkari
2025:BHC-AS:31159-DB
KVM 55 - WP 2825-2025.doc
Digitally signed
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
by KANCHAN
KANCHAN VINOD
VINOD MAYEKAR
MAYEKAR Date:
2025.07.25
13:16:07 +0530 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2825 OF 2025
Yogesh @ Charu Ananda Chandane ...Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondent
______________________
Ms.Maya Majumdar a/w. Ms.Akanksha Shukla for Petitioner.
Smt. Prajakta P. Shinde, AP.P. for Respondent No. 1 - State.
______________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 15th JULY, 2025
P.C.:-
1) The Petitioner has filed this Petition for grant of parole leave to
him.
2) Heard Ms.Majumdar, learned Advocate appointed for Petitioner
and learned A.P.P.. Perused record.
3) Record indicates that Petitioner had requested for parole leave
on the ground that, his father is suffering from lumbar spine ailment and he has been advised to undergo surgery urgently by the concerned surgeon. The request of the Petitioner has been turned down by the Competent Authority of the Jail Administration on the ground that the Petitioner is convicted and sentenced to undergo for life imprisonment in two cases i.e. 1/3 ::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 03:21:18 ::: KVM 55 - WP 2825-2025.doc
(i) Sessions Case No. 89 of 2013, dated 10 th October 2017, for the offence under Sections 302, 364A, 201 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) and (ii) Sessions Case No. 115 of 2013, dated 4th May 2019, for the offence under Sections 377, 293, 506 of I.P.C. and Sections 3, 4, 5 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
4) Ms. Majumdar, learned Advocate appearing for Petitioner submitted that, there in no other person to take care of the father of Petitioner after he undergoes surgery. That, the brother of Petitioner is settled in America and it is difficult for him to get leave to come down to India and to attend his ailing father. She submitted that, the mother of Petitioner is staying separately at Pune as the entire village has ostracised their family due the acts of the Petitioner. She therefore requested that, the Petitioner may be released on parole leave.
5) Perusal of record indicates that, the police in their report has stated that, the Petitioner is a hardened criminal and if he is released on parole leave, there is every possibility that the Petitioner may indulge into retaliation causing threat to the life of the witnesses who deposed against him. The Medical Certificate dated 26 th February, 2025 issued by the concerned surgeon mentions that, after 24 th January, 2025, the father of the Petitioner did not attend the said hospital even for once for treatment and therefore it appears that there is no emergency to perform the said operation/surgery upon the father of Petitioner.
2/3 ::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 03:21:18 :::
KVM 55 - WP 2825-2025.doc 6) Record indicates that, the Petitioner has a brother who is
equally responsible to take care of his father. Perusal of record reveals that, the Competent Authority so also the Appellate Authority have not committed any error while passing the respective impugned Orders.
7) In view of the above, we are not inclined to accede to the request of the Petitioner for releasing him on parole leave.
8) Petition is accordingly dismissed. (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.) 3/3 ::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 02/08/2025 03:21:18 :::