1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WIT PETITION NO. 1563 OF 2008 DIST.: MUMBAI Sardar Shahwali Khan ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. N.N. Gavankar i/by Mr. Arfan Sait for the Petitioner Mr. A.S. Gadkari, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the Respondents. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and A.A. KUMBHAKONI, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 1, 2008 P.C.:- The application of the petitioner for parole has been rejected on 8th May, 2008. The petitioner sought parole on the ground that his father was not well. This is not disputed in the impugned order. But the application has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has another brother, who could take care of his father. Another ground for rejection is that the petitioner was involved in a bomb blast case. Therefore, the possibility of untoward incidents on his release cannot be 2 ruled out. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Additional Public Prosecutor, and with their consent, dispose of the matter at this stage. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner was an appealable order, and, therefore, the Writ Petition should be dismissed. We feel that such technical objections should not be taken in the matter like the present one. If the petitioner is now directed to file an appeal, its disposal would take some time, and the purpose for which parole is sought is likely to get defeated. 4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted that since the petitioner was involved in the Serial Bomb Blast Case and has been convicted, it is apprehended that his release may create problem. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial went on for a number of years, and during the trial for a number of 3 years, he was on bail, and there was no problem. Even after conviction, at the initial stage, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had granted him bail, and during that period also, there was no problem, and after his bail was cancelled by the Hon' ble Supreme Court, he surrendered well within time. 6. In these circumstances, we feel that this is a fit case in which the petitioner can be released on parole. Therefore, we direct the concerned authority to allow the petitioner parole in accordance with the rules on usual conditions. This petition is accordingly allowed. BILAL NAZKI, J. A.A. KUMBHAKONI, J.