(1.) Jayant Shetty and Sudhakar Shetty are carrying on the business of running restaurants at D'Mello Road, Wadi Bunder and Dr. Ambedkar Road, Byculla. According to the petitioners a number of notorious gangs operate in their locality which extort protection money from the shop-keepers and have unleashed a reign of terror in that area. Ramakant Naik, Arun Gawali and Babu Resham who are respondents to the present petition have master-minded the gangs and all the three were convicted of murder of one Parasnath in Case No. 343 of 1980 by the Sessions Court, Bombay and sentenced to life imprisonment. The three accused along with others filed an appeal before the High Court in which they were granted bail in November 1982. While the accused persons were at large on bail it is alleged that they committed murder of one Sridhar nephew of Jayant Shetty - the first petitioner - on 4-3-1983. With a view to perpetuating their vice-like grip over the locality the accused continued to threaten the petitioners and the members of their family to such an extent that the petitioner had to file Writ Petition No. 225 of 1983 in this Court in which orders were passed for affording sufficient and adequate police protection to them and members of their family. With this turn of events, the State filed an, Application No. 659 of 1983 in the High Court where the appeals were pending for cancellation of bail and the bail was cancelled on 20-10-1983. In spite of cancellation of bail, by the High Court, Respondents Ramakant Naik and Babu Resham were released on parole by the responde No. 2 the then Minister for Jails and it is this release on parole that is being challenged by the present petition.
(2.) The respondent State of Maharashtra has supported the grant of parole under the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 under which the State Government claims legal competence to grant parole to a convicted prisoner on grounds such as the conduct in and outside the jail; the point of time of parole etc.
(3.) A perusal of the relevant file No. PAR-1684/18(544)PRS-3 of the Home Department - which, it would be fair enough to say, was ungrudgingly produced by the State - shows that Mrs. Ratnaprabha S. Naik filed an application before the Honourable Minister for Jails on 2-8-1984 requesting that her brother Ramakant S. Naik who was interned in Thane Central Jail may be released on parole so that he could attend to her in the K.E.M. hospital where she was undergoing treatment. The Hon'ble Minister made an endorsement : "Secretary (Jails) Parole granted for one month Issue orders." Sd/- The order was forthwith issued by the Assistant Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra directing the Superintendent Thane Central Prison to release Ramakant S. Naik on parole for a period of 30 days. On 29-8-1984 the Commissioner of Police for Greater Bombay wrote to the Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department that as per the orders of Government Ramakant S. Naik has been released on parole on furnishing the cash bond of Rs. 2000/- on 6-8-1984. On the same day i.e. on 6-8-1984 a letter was received by the Additional Commissioner of Police from the Home department requiring the latter to inform him as to whether police department recommends the release of the prisoner on parole. The Commissioner complained that the prisoner had been released before any report could be sent on these points. The Commissioner then referred to law and order situation in the city after the communal disturbances and the impending Ganpati and Bakri Idd festivals. He apprehended that the presence of Ramakant Naik in the city would encourage communal trouble; that he is likely to form a new gang; that his sister's sickness is not of any serious nature requiring his attention and lastly that if Ramakant Naik is allowed to move freely his presence will deter prosecution witnesses from deposing to the truth before the Court. The Commissioner concluded that in view of these circumstances Government should cancel the parole granted to prisoner No. 1680-Ramakant S. Naik.