1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2578 OF 2008 Chandrakant Dhondu Bhoir. ..... ..... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ..... ..... Respondent. Mr. M. A. Chaudhari, Advocate appointed for the Petitioner. Mrs. P. H. Kantharia, APP for the Respondent. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATED : 17TH JANUARY, 2009. P.C.: The petitioner' s application for parole is rejected on the ground of the report of the police that there is a likelihood of the petitioner intimidating the witnesses who appeared against him in the trial. This is a far fetched excuse given by the police to deny the parole to the petitioner because the trial is completed in the year 2003 and after the petitioner going to jail he was even released once on furlough on 30th April, 2007 and he surrendered back well within time. If he had to harass, intimidate or in any case harm the witnesses, he would have done so on the first opportunity. Therefore, we do not agree with the reasoning given by the police on the basis of which the application of the petitioner was rejected. 2 2. Accordingly, we allow the writ petition and direct that the petitioner be granted parole for a period of 15 (fifteen) days subject to the conditions to be imposed upon by the Jail Authority. 3. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)