1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2747 OF 2008 Abdul Latif Hasan Miya Bedekar. ..... ..... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ..... ..... Respondent. None present for the Petitioner. Mrs. P. H. Kantharia, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATED : 21ST JANUARY, 2009. P.C.: The petitioner was released on parole on 3rd November, 2007 for a period of 30 days. Earlier to 26th November, 2007 the prisoner filed an application for extension of parole by another 30 days on health ground. The application was neither rejected nor accepted till the expiry of the period of parole and the prisoner overstayed till 6th January, 2008. The order of rejection of extension of parole leave was passed on 20th December, 2008 and was communicated to the prisoner on the same day. Thereafter he has been punished by an order of 3rd May, 2008. Thereafter, the prisoner also made another application for regularisation of his overstay which was rejected and a punishment was given of cutting the days of remission by the days of 2 overstay. 2. In the circumstances of this case, we feel that since the petitioner had applied in time for extension, the respondent should have either granted extension or rejected the application before the expiry of the parole leave. Since the application was decided on 20th December, 2007, we do not think that the respondent was right in not regularising the absence from 4th December, 2007 till 20th December, 2007. 3. Therefore, we direct that the period of overstay from 4th December, 2007 till 20th December, 2007 be regularised. 4. We further direct the respondent that whenever an application is made by a prisoner at a time when there is reasonable time to consider the application for extension, it should be preferably decided before the period of leave is over. 5. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)