Prisons Act (9 of 1894) , S.59— Maharashtra Prisons (Mumbai Furlough and Parole) Rules (1959) , R.19(1)(c)(ii)— Emergency parole - Rejection of - Prisoner challenging said order, as per which his application for grant of emergency parole leave for 45 days was rejected - Prisoner convicted u/Ss.302, 323, 143, 148, and 149 of IPC and u/Ss.4, 25 of Arms Act - As prisoner was convicted under provisions of Arms Act, order passed by respondent rejecting his application for releasing him on emergency parole leave cannot be faulted with - Rejection proper.

(Para 6 7)

Disaster Management Act (53 of 2005) , S.20(3)— Constitution of India , Art.21— Covid 19 Pandemic - Shopkeepers seeking special relaxation on occasion of 'Bakrid' on ground that they have stocked up goods for purpose of Bakrid very early -Relaxation for one day to Category D area on occasion of 'Bakrid' is wholly uncalled for - Pressure groups of all kinds, religious or otherwise, cannot interfere with most precious Fundamental Right of life all citizens.

(Para 9 10)

Negotiable Instruments Act (26 of 1881) , S.138— Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.203— Dishonour of cheque - Dismissal of complaint - On account of non-prosecution due to absence of complainant - Due to Covid-19 pandemic, proceedings conducted through video conference and parties not allowed to attend Court - Due to said reason complainant could not appear in Court - Explanation offered by complainant reasonable and extremely probable - It was very difficult for accused, complainant and witnesses to put in appearance for factors beyond their control - As such Court should not have dismissed matter due to non-prosecution and should have taken other recourses -Complaint ordered to be restored.

(Para 7 9)

Negotiable Instruments Act (26 of 1881) , S.138— Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.203— Dishonour of cheque - Dismissal of complaint - On account of non-prosecution due to absence of complainant - A perusal of all order sheets reveals that both parties were absent on so many occasions, thus to blame complainant alone for absence would not be appropriate - Complaint ordered to be restored.

(Para 8 11)

Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.482— Quashing of proceedings - Offence u/Ss. 143,188 of IPC- Allegations of raising slogans by lawyers against order of Court - Investigation does not reveal identification of any such lawyer by investigator - It is not mentioned that what was language of slogans and against which order of Court, Advocates were protesting - Advocates, who are saviour of Freedom of Speech, registration of FIR without any legally admissible evidence would only dampen their spirits - No reason to continue FIR - FIR and all consequential proceedings liable to be quashed.

(Para 3 6 8)