1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRI WRIT PETITION NO. 381 OF 2010. (KRUSHNA LAHANU NAROTE...VS... STATE OF MAHARASHTA THR. DIG PRISONS & OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Ms. P.D. Rane, Advocate (appointed) for Petitioner. Mr. S.J.Jichkar, A.P.P. for Respondents. CORAM : A.P.LAVANDE AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 03, 2010. Heard Ms. Rane, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jichkar, learned A.P.P. for the respondents. In this petition the petitioner has made a grievance that Constable Vijay Pawar has demanded Rs.two thousand from his wife and since the amount was not paid adverse police report was sent when the petitioner sought parole. According to the reply filed on behalf of the respondents verification of the parole was not conducted by H.C. Vijay Pawar, however, it was done by H.C. Madhukar Maind, as such question of H.C. Vijay demanding Rs.2,000/- does not arise. Ms. Rane, further submits that based on the above report petitioner's request for parole has been rejected and as such the order rejecting parole is liable to be set aside. The copy of the order passed 2 by the competent authority has not been placed on record. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this challenge in the instant petition. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the rejection of the parole, if he is so advised. Fees payable to Ms.P. D. Rane, Advocate appointed to appear on behalf of the petitioner are quantified at Rs.seven hundred and fifty only. JUDGE JUDGE RR.