Dipak Subhash Patil v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
The petition is dismissed
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. In the circumstances, no interference is warranted in the fact situation of the present case. The petition is dismissed.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2973 OF 2012 [THROUGH JAIL] Dipak Subhash Patil Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Petitioner ...Respondent Mr.R.Satyanarayana, amicus curiae. ...... Mrs.S.D.Shinde, A.P.P. for Respondent. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATED:- SEPTEMBER 17, 2012. P.C.
#1. This letter petition is received through Jail. It takes exception to the decision of the Appropriate Authority in refusing to accept the request of the petitioner to release the petitioner on furlough leave for reasons recorded in the order. Amongst others, it is noticed that in the past, the petitioner has overstayed on two occasions. On the last occasion, he overstayed 1232 days and was required to be arrested by the police. This default committed by the petitioner as per Rule 4(10) itself disentitles him from being released on furlough. The Rule unambiguously predicates that SQ Pathan 2 the categories of prisoners covered under Rule 4 shall not be considered for release on furlough. Sub-rule (10) thereof provides that the prisoners who have at any time escaped or attempted to escape from lawful custody or have defaulted in any way in surrendering themselves at the appropriate time after release on parole or furlough.
#2. In the circumstances, no interference is warranted in the fact situation of the present case. The petition is dismissed.
#3. The Court expresses a word of gratitude for the able assistance extended by the learned amicus curiae to espouse the cause of the petitioner.
#4. Copy of this order be forthwith forwarded to the petitioner, who is in jail, for information. ( R.Y.GANOO, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.) SQ Pathan
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition is dismissed
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 17 Sep 2012. The bench was R Y GANOO, A M KHANWILKAR.
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.