r)) IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 925 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- SARDARJI VAGHAJI Versus STATE -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MS KU MISHRA for the petitioner MR MUKESH A PATEL, APP for Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of Decision : 27/10/99 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Leaving apart the question whether on the grounds stated by the petitioner, parole leave could have been granted to him or not, when he applied for the parole leave, his application shall have to be decided by the competent authority within a reasonable time. He filed this application for parole leave on 7.10.1999 and if the grievance of petitioner is correct then it has to be decided within a reasonable time. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application has not been decided so far. 3. Mr.Patel, learned APP for the respondents states that, in case this fact is correct, he will see that the application aforesaid of the petitioner shall be decided by the competent authority within a reasonable time. In view of these facts, otherwise also, it is a premature matter. 4. In the result, this Special Criminal Application is dismissed. However, it is expected of the competent authority to decide the application aforesaid of the petitioner within 10 days from the date of the receipt of the writ of this order if it is not decided so far. Rule discharged. No order as to costs. (S.K.Keshote,J.) (pathan)