Supreme Court of India was dealing with the petition filed by the convict petitioner seeking direction in the nature of Mandamus to the State of Gujarat to consider his application for premature release under the policy dated 9th July, 1992 which was existing at the time of his conviction.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner along with other co-accused persons faced trial for the offence under Section 302, 376 (2) (e) (g) read with Section 149 IPC committed in the State of Gujarat in 2004. Undisputedly, the crime was committed in the State of Gujarat but this Court in Transfer Petition, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, considered it appropriate to transfer Sessions Case pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dahod/Ahmedabad to the competent Court in Mumbai for trial and disposal by an Order dated 6th August 2004. The learned trial Court, Mumbai in Sessions Case, after holding trial, held the petitioner guilty and convicted him for the aforestated offences and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life by judgment dated 21st January 2008.
Respondent’s Contention:
Learned counsel for the respondent’s placed reliance on the judgment of Union of India v. Sriharan and submitted that since the trial has been concluded in the State of Maharashtra, taking assistance of Section 432(7) CrPC, the expression ‘appropriate Government’ as referred to under Section 433 CrPC in the instant case, would be the State of Maharashtra and accordingly no error has been committed by the High Court in the order impugned.
SC’s Observations:
After hearing both the sides SC stated that the crime in the instant case was admittedly committed in the State of Gujarat and ordinarily, the trial was to be concluded in the same State and in terms of Section 432(7) CrPC, the appropriate Government in the ordinary course would be the State of Gujarat but the instant case was transferred in exceptional circumstances by this Court for limited purpose for trial and disposal to the neighbouring State (State of Maharashtra) by an order dated 06th August, 2004 but after the conclusion of trial and the prisoner being convicted, stood transferred to the State where the crime was committed remain the appropriate Government for the purpose of Section 432(7) CrPC.
SC Held:
After evaluating submissions made by both the parties the SC held that “In the instant case, once the crime was committed in the State of Gujarat, after the trial been concluded and judgment of conviction came to be passed, all further proceedings have to be considered including remission or premature release, as the case may be, in terms of the policy which is applicable in the State of Gujarat where the crime was committed and not the State where the trial stands transferred and concluded for exceptional reasons under the orders of this Court. Consequently, the petition is allowed. The judgment impugned dated 17th July, 2019 is set aside.”
Case Title: Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
Bench: J. Ajay Rastogi and J. Vikram Nath
Citation: WRIT PETITION(CRL.) NO(S). 135 OF 2022
Decided on: 13th May, 2022
Picture Source :
