1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 921 OF 2009 Johny @ Abdul Rahim Khalil Khalik Shaikh. (At present Convict No.4295) Open Prison,Paithan, District Aurangabad. ... Petitioner V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ... Mrs. M.D.Thube-Mhase Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. K.G.Patil, A.P.P. for respondent. ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.NIRGUDE,JJ Date :10th NOVEMBER,2009. ORAL JUDGMENT :(PER : P.V. HARDAS, J.) 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2] The communication sent by the petitioner through Jail, came to be registered as Criminal Writ Petition. This Court appointed 2 Smt.M.D.Thube-Mhase as counsel to represent the petitioner in this petition. This petition has been filed by the petitioner complaining therein that his application seeking his release on parole on ground of illness of his mother came to be rejected by the impugned order in the present petition. 3] The petitioner, who is convicted and undergoing imprisonment for life, has submitted an application seeking his release on parole, on the ground that his mother was suffering from kidney stone and requires immediate surgery. There is no dispute so far as ailment of mother is concerned as well as gravity of illness. The application of the petitioner came to be rejected on the sole ground that the petitioner has brother, who is of 30 years age and therefore, capable of looking after the ill mother. Similar stand is also taken by the respondent in the affidavit in reply, at paragraph No. 3. It is stated that the brother of petitioner, that is Naim, who is of 30 years age is competent to look 3 after his mother, who is suffering from Kidney Stone. The reply affidavit disclose that no inquiry was made nor the house of petitioner was visited to ascertain if the brother of the petitioner was residing with his mother. 4] The mother of the petitioner has filed an affidavit, in which it is stated by the mother of the petitioner that Naim does not reside with mother of the petitioner and as such he is not capable of looking after the mother of the petitioner. In that light of the matter, therefore, it was essential for the respondent to have conducted some sort of inquiry to ascertain/determine, if Naim resides with the mother of the petitioner. In absence of that material, we are inclined to accept the affidavit filed by the mother of the petitioner. 5] For the foregoing reasons, therefore, this petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to release the petitioner on parole for the period prayed for by the petitioner on such 4 terms and condition which respondent-authority may deem fit and proper. We further find that on previous occasion the petitioner was prompt in reporting back to the Jail Authority, after the aforesaid period ended. Petition is thus allowed. Rule is made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. We however, quantify the fees payable to Smt. M.D. Thube- Mhase learned counsel appointed for the petitioner at Rs.3000/-. ( A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) MTK/Cri.W.P.921.09