1 wp1203.11 ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1203 OF 2011 Balaji Maroti Jadhav. ....Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ....Respondent. Mr. D.G.Khamkar, advocate appointed for petitioner. Mr. J.P.Yagnik, APP for State. CORAM:- P.V.HARDAS AND M.N.GILANI, JJ DATED:- MAY 5, 2011 P.C. 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the Counsel for the parties, this Petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2 A communication has been sent by the Petitioner through jail, which is registered as criminal writ petition. We accordingly, appoint Mr.Khamkar as an advocate to represent the Petitioner in this Petition. 3 Grievance of the Petitioner is that he be released on furlough. The learned APP points out on the basis of the instructions from the jail authorities that the application submitted by the Petitioner is pending and 2 wp1203.11 has not been decided as initially the surety named by the Petitioner declined to stand surety for the Petitioner. However, subsequently, an affidavit has been filed by the surety expressing his willingness to stand as surety for the Petitioner. Learned APP further states on the basis of the instructions from the jail authorities that the application filed by the Petitioner would be decided in accordance with law within a period of one week from today. 2 We accept the statement made by the learned APP as an undertaking to the Court and accordingly make rule absolute in terms of the statement made by the learned APP as an undertaking to the Court, with no order as to costs. (M.N.GILANI, J) (P.V.HARDAS, J)