Virendrasingh Ramprakarsingh ... vs State Of Mah., Thr. Its Secretary ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3243 Bom

                        1                            wp70.20.odt




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR


             CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.70 OF 2020



Virendrasingh Ramprakarsingh
Khairnar, Aged about Major,
Presently detained at Central
Prison, Nagpur, District
Nagpur, Convict No.C-9048...               ......      PETITIONER


     // VERSUS //


1.The State of Maharashtra,
  Through its Secretary,
  Home Department,
  Mumbai.

2.The Superintendent of Prison,
  Central Prison, Nagpur,
  District Nagpur,
  Maharashtra.                            ........   RESPONDENTS


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
         Mr.A.A.Pannase, Advocate (appointed) for the petitioner.
         Ms H.N.Jaipurkar, A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                          2                           wp70.20.odt


                             CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE &
                                     AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

DATE : 18.2.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J) :

1. Heard Mr.A.A.Pannase, learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2. Rule.

3. Ms H.N.Jaipurkar, Additional Public Prosecutor waives

service for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

4. Mr.A.A.Pannase, learned Counsel for the petitioner, on

instructions, submits that the petitioner would confine himself only to

prayer clause (1a) of the petition and would give up the prayer made

in clause (2) thereof. Accordingly, we have heard this matter finally

after issuing Rule.

5. The grievance of petitioner is about mechanical opinion

submitted by the concerned Additional Sessions Judge at Nagpur.

3 wp70.20.odt

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was

desirous to claim benefits regarding remission of his sentence in

terms of Government Resolution dt.3.6.2017 and according to the

petitioner, the petitioner is eligible as per the conditions of eligibility

prescribed in the said Government Resolution. Learned Counsel for

the petitioner submits that the concerned Additional Sessions Judge,

however, travelled beyond the conditions of eligibility prescribed in

the Government Resolution dt.3.6.2017 while recording his negative

opinion in the matter and such exercise is not permissible in law,

which is also the opinion given by this Court in it's recent Judgment

delivered in Criminal Writ Petition No.32 of 2021, dated 15.2.2021.

6. Ms H.N.Jaipurkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

graciously submits that the issue involved in this petition is squarely

covered by the view already taken by this Court and we would also

agree with her. In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned

opinion is hereby quashed and set aside.

The matter is remanded back to the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Nagpur of the concerned Court for recording his

opinion keeping in view the directions issued by this Court in the

Judgment delivered in Criminal Writ Petition No.32 of 2021, dated 4 wp70.20.odt

15.2.2021.

7. We request the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court to

circulate a copy of the Judgment delivered in Criminal Writ Petition

No.32 of 2021 decided on 15.2.2021 amongst the Officers of District

Judiciary and also send a copy thereof to the Maharashtra Judicial

Academy, Uttan, District Thane for bringing the directions of this

Court issued therein to the notice of the trainees.

Rule accordingly.

Fees of the learned Counsel (appointed) for the petitioner

are quantified at Rs.2,500/-.

                       JUDGE                          JUDGE



jaiswal
                                     Digitally
                                     signed by
                          Suraj      Suraj Jaiswal
                                     Date:
                          Jaiswal    2021.02.18
                                     17:40:03
                                     +0530