KALEKHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the sides are heard for some time. In Cri. Writ Petition No.1069 of 2020 it is the contention of the petitioner that he filed application for emergency parole on 10.08.2020 but as on the date of the proceeding i.e. on 18.09.2020 the application is not decided. In second proceeding bearing no.1071 of 2020 it is the contention of the petitioner that he had also given application on 10.08.2020 but as on 18.09.2020 this application is not decided. When for the first time these matters were called out, learned APP Shri Gujarati submitted that he wants to collect the information about the present stage of the matters so these two matters were kept back. This matters were again called out at 11.30 am and when the matters were called out the learned APP produced on record copies of orders made on these two applications on 23.09.2020 i.e. today itself. Both the applications are shown to be rejected by giving reason that not on a single occasion they had availed either parole or furlough in the past. In the matter of Ramesh (Cri.W.P. No. 1071 of 2020) one more reason is given that in the past when he was released on two occasions, in the year 2017 he turned up late by 2201 days and he was required to be arrested and brought to jail. Thus, it can be said that Ramesh was apparently not eligible for getting emergency parole but in respect of Kalekhan the same thing cannot be said.

(2.) There are allegations of corruption at least against the officers of Aurangabad Central Jail. To see that there is transparency and fairness this Court had directed many times to see that all the eligible prisoners are considered together and orders are made on emergency parole. This Court had also expressed that the prisoner who wants to avail emergency parole under Government notification dated 08.05.2020 may avail it and prisoner who does not want to avail it may not avail the same. That way transparency could have been achieved and fairness could have been shown. It appears that even for acceptance of the application for emergency parole the prisoners were harassed. The present cases show that the applications were kept pending and they were not decided even after the period of more than one month.

(3.) Due to the possibility of corruption and to see that there is fairness and transparency in the action of respondents this Court had made an order in Cri. Writ Petition No.935 of 2020 (Dinkar Vs. State & Anr.) and in Cri. Writ Petition No. 936 of 2020 (Kalekhan V/s. State and Anr.) Thus Kalekhan was present before us as petitioner in Cri. Writ Petition No. 936 of 2020 and after hearing both the sides due to aforesaid circumstances this Court had made some observations and directions were given, the same are as under: