Bombay High Court
Jarina Pirmohammed Kasam Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 17 November, 2017
Bench: V.K. Tahilramani
4. cri wp 3057-17.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3057 OF 2017
Jarina Pirmohammed Kasam Shaikh .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
...................
Appearances
Ms. Ankita Naik i/by
Mrs. Indrayani M. Koparkar Advocate for the Petitioner
Mrs. G.P. Mulekar APP for the State
...................
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : NOVEMBER 17, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :
1. Heard both sides.
2. The case of the petitioner is that she is 65 years of age,
hence, she should get the benefit of Government Resolution
dated 10.1.2006 which states that the prisoners who are
sentenced to life imprisonment, if they are weak and have
completed 65 years of age, have to undergo only actual
jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 4
4. cri wp 3057-17.doc
imprisonment of 14 years and on completion of 65 years,
they are entitled to be released from prison provided that
they do not fall under clause 3 of the said G.R.
3. At present, we are not concerned with the clause 3 of
the said G.R. On perusal of the said G.R., we find that it is
applicable to the prisoners who are sentenced to life
imprisonment, who are above 65 years of age provided that
they are weak.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on X-
Ray report of the knees of the petitioner to show that she
has early degenarative changes in the form of osteophytes.
However, from the said X-Ray report, it is seen that no
obvious bony injury or lesion is seen. The joint space and
integrity is well maintained and the soft tissues appear
normal. Thus, this X-Ray report is not such that it shows that
the petitioner is suffering from any weakness. Learned APP,
on the other hand, placed reliance on the medical reports of
jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 4
4. cri wp 3057-17.doc
the petitioner dated 10.6.2017 and 31.8.2017. Both the
reports show that the general physical and mental health
condition of the petitioner is stable. It further shows that she
is regularly working as agricultural labourer. It further shows
that she is physically fit to perform her duties in agricultural
field and she is not suffering from any illness like
hypertension and diabetes. Thus, this clearly shows that the
petitioner is not weak. The petitioner is not only working as
an agricultural labourer in the field but she is also getting
wages from the same. In view of this, the petitioner is not
covered by G.R. dated 10.1.2006.
5. Another factor which shows that the petitioner is not
covered by the said G.R. is that the age of the petitioner as
per the jail records is 59 years as on today. No doubt, the
learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on one
certificate issued by Sassoon Hospital on 31.3.2015. This
certificate shows that the petitioner is 65 years of age in
appearance. It is noticed that this certificate has been
jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 4
4. cri wp 3057-17.doc
issued for senior citizen purpose only and it has been issued
only on the basis of appearance of the person before that
medical officer. In fact, the certificate clearly states that
there is no clinical and radiological method to ascertain the
age of a person after the age of 25 years. There is no other
document to show that the age of the petitioner is over 65
years. Even assuming that the age of the petitioner is 65
years, looking to the medical certificates of the petitioner,
she cannot be covered by the said G.R. Thus, it is not
possible for us to entertain this petition. Rule is discharged.
[ M.S. KARNIK, J ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj 4 of 4
