Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: parole rules in Rahul S/O Ashok Shardul vs State Of Mah. Thr. Deputy Inspector ... on 3 August, 2022Matching Fragments
3. Shri Raju Kadu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that although alternative remedy in the form of appeal is available, since the impugned order displays non- application of mind and it is in the teeth of the relevant Rules, as well as policy of the State itself manifested in the Circular dated 25/10/2001, this Court may entertain and consider the present petition.
4. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the application for grant of furlough has been rejected, only on the ground of Rules 4(4) and 4(6) of the Bombay Furlough and Parole Rules, 1959. The two grounds being adverse police report and conduct of the petitioner not being satisfactory. A reference is also made in the impugned order to another proceeding, wherein the petitioner was an accused for offences punishable under Sections 326, 323, 324, 504 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.