Mohsin Ali Taj Mohd. Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra
2018 Latest Caselaw 379 Bom

 jdk                                                  1                                              6.crwp.4440.16.j.doc


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4440 OF 2016

C/10968 Mohasin Ali Taj
Mohd. Shaikh                                                                     .. Petitioner

                    Vs.

The State of Maharashtra                                                         .. Respondent


                               ....
Mr. Ashish S. Sawant Advocate for Petitioner
Mr. Arfan Sait A.P.P. for the State
                               ....


                                        CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.
                                                AND M.S.KARNIK, J.

DATED : JANUARY 12, 2018

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, ACJ]:

1                   Heard both sides.



2                   By judgment and order dated 8.10.1993 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions

Case No. 956 of 1988, the petitioner has been convicted and

sentenced mainly under Section 302 read with Section 34 of

IPC. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Criminal

Appeal No. 630 of 1993 before this Court. By judgment and

order dated 7.12.2016, the appeal preferred by the petitioner

1 of 2

jdk 2 6.crwp.4440.16.j.doc

came to be dismissed.

3 The grievance of the petitioner is that no set off has

been granted to him of the period of detention undergone by

him prior to his conviction. Admittedly, the petitioner was

arrested on 26.5.1988. Thereafter he was granted bail on

29.8.1988. Thus, prior to conviction, he was in custody for

about three months. The grievance of the petitioner is that he

has not been given set off for the period that he was in custody

prior to the date of his conviction. In this view of the matter, it

is directed that as and when the case of the petitioner comes up

for consideration before the State Government for premature

release, the period that he was in custody prior to his

conviction, shall be taken into account by the State Government

as well as the jail authorities.

4 Rule made absolute in above terms. Petition is

disposed of.

M.S.KARNIK, J. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

kandarkar

2 of 2