✦ Bombay High Court · 29 Jul 2022

Popat Kisan Rahire v. The State of Maharashtra

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 55. Writ petition, therefore, cannot be entertained and is rejected. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Judgment

Judgment

skn 1 213-WP-6587.2021.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 6587 OF 2021 Popat Kisan Rahire. … Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra. … Respondent. Through Jail. Mrs.S.D.Shinde, APP for the Respondent- State. SANJAY KASHINATH NANOSKAR Digitally signed by SANJAY KASHINATH NANOSKAR 16:21:44 +0530 CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND N.R. BORKAR, JJ. DATE : 29 July 2022. P.C. : By this petition, the Petitioner has sought to be released on emergency (Covid-19) parole. The Petitioner has filed an interim application and various letters that his request to be considered to be released on emergency (Covid-19) parole.

#2. By an amendment to Rule 19 of the Maharashtra Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, policy of emergency (Covid-19), in light of Covid-19 pandemic, was introduced. Thereafter through Government Resolutions and the reports submitted by the High Power Committee under the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court certain categorization of offences were excluded from the consideration to be released on emergency bail. skn 2 213-WP-6587.2021.doc One of them is section 376 of Indian Penal Code and it was also provided that the convicts under the Special Acts were excluded from granting such emergency parole.

#3. The learned APP points out that the Petitioner was convicted under section 376 of IPC and under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Therefore, the Petitioner was not entitled as per the categorization made under the Government Resolutions and the amendment to Rule 19 and the report of the High Power Committee.

#4. Even otherwise, as on today, as per the Government Resolution dated 4 May 2022, the policy of granting emergency (Covid-19) parole is discontinued. Therefore, no such relief can be granted.

#5. Writ petition, therefore, cannot be entertained and is rejected. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 376; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 29 Jul 2022. The bench was NITIN JAMDAR, N R BORKAR.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 6587 of 2021). ← Search more judgments