SHOYAB MEHTAB ALI Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Considering the controversy involved in the matter, and by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties, Criminal Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission by issuing Rule, making the same returnable forthwith.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 14/7/2020 passed by respondent no.1 Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati rejecting grant of regular parole in terms of Rule 19[3] of the Maharashtra Prison (Parole and Furlough) Rules. The petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Ss. 302 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.). He was ordered to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the I.P.C. and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for the offence punishable under Sec. 397 of the I.P.C.

(3.) The petitioner has sought regular parole on account of serious illness of his father. In support of said contention he has produced medical certificate. The petitioner is in jail from 30/6/2013, and thus according to him, including the period of set off and remission, he has undergone sentence for 10 years, therefore eligible for grant of parole leave.