Gujarat High Court
SCR.A/1628/1996 of BACHUBHAI MANGABHAI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT on 5 December 1996
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 1628 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble THE CHIEF JUSTICE G.D.KAMAT ============================================================ -------------------------------------------------------------- BACHUBHAI MANGABHAI Versus
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 1628 of 1996
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble THE CHIEF JUSTICE G.D.KAMAT
============================================================ -------------------------------------------------------------- BACHUBHAI MANGABHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
THROUGH JAIL for Petitioner
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent No. 1
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE G.D.KAMAT
Date of decision: 05/12/96
ORAL JUDGEMENT
Rule. To be heard forthwith.
Petitioner Bachubhai Mangabhai Patel is incarcerated in Central Jail, Vadodara pursuant to his conviction under Section 302 and sentenced to life imprisonment. He moved an application for furlough, which was rejected by the Jail Authorities on the ground that the Police had submitted a report adverse to him that in the event he is released on furlough, he is likely to disturb the peace. It was also rejected on the ground that since appeal against his conviction and sentence is pending in this High Court, his application for furlough cannot be considered. A learned single Judge of this Court has taken a view that mere pendency of the appeal in the High Court cannot come in the way of the Jail Authorities in granting furlough and the decision of the Division Bench is restricted to the power of the authorities to grant parole during the pendency of the appeal. The fact remains that the petitioner has undergone a substantive sentence of nearly seven years, which cannot be overlooked and accordingly, the Jail Authorities are directed to reconsider his application for furlough within 15 days from today. Rule accordingly is made absolute, as indicated.
*******
(apj)