BHARAT KARUBHA JADIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 28-REJECTED @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- SANJEEV THAKER
Holding
The court refused to grant parole leave, finding the petitioner’s past absconding to preclude the exercise of discretion in his favour.
Summary
The petitioner, Bharat Karubha Jadiya, filed a Special Criminal Application seeking a 30‑day parole leave to provide financial assistance to his family. The application was filed through the jail, with the State of Gujarat represented by Ms. Shruti Pathak. The court examined the jail’s remarks, which disclosed that the petitioner had previously absconded during furlough leaves—once for 11 days in 2023 and again for 4 days in 2025. Considering these prior violations, the court held that the petitioner’s conduct demonstrated a lack of reliability and that exercising discretion to grant parole would be inappropriate. Consequently, the court rejected the parole application and directed the registry to inform the jail authority.
Issues considered
- Whether parole leave should be granted to the petitioner despite his prior absconding during furlough leaves
Subjects
Judgment
R/SCR.A/5310/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (PAROLE LEAVE) NO. 5310 of
2026
==========================================================
BHARAT KARUBHA JADIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
THROUGH JAIL for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 20/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition, through jail, is filed by the petitioner seeking
parole leave for 30 days on the ground of financial assistance to his
family.
2. The jail remarks indicate that earlier when the petitioner was
released on furlough leave, he absconded for 11 days when
released in the year 2023 and he absconded for 4 days when
released in the year 2025. Considering the said aspect, this Court
is not inclined to exercise discretion. The petition is rejected,
accordingly.
3. Registry to communicate this order to the concerned jail
authority.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
SRILATHA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SRILATHA VENKATARAO UPADHYAYULA(HC00185), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 20/04/2026 15:37:47
Page 1 of 1
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.