Clint S/O. Ernest Fernandes ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3373 Bom

                                        {1}              CRI WP 928 OF 2022


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

              1001 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.928 OF 2022
                  CLINT S/O. ERNEST FERNANDES (C-161)
                                   VERSUS
               THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                     ...
               Advocate for Petitioners : Ms.Chate Sharada P.
                APP for Respondents-State : Mr.R.V.Dasalkar
                                     ...

                               CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
                                       ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.

                               DATE :    5 April 2023

 PER COURT :-

 .        Heard both the sides.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by his placement for granting

remission in category 7(a) of the Government Guidelines of the

year 1992, which according to him is not applicable since the

death sentence was commuted by the Supreme Court and not by

the Government. He claims to be placed in the category 3(b).

3. Inspite of Judgment of the Constitution Bench of the

Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India vs. Sriharan @

Murugan and others; [(2014) 11 SCC 1] and inspite of the

decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Yovehel Vijaykumar

Gouri vs. State of Maharashtra and Others; [2020 (6) Mh.L.J.

571], though the Presiding Ofcer of the Court in report

{2} CRI WP 928 OF 2022

submitted under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

had expressly, for the reasons recorded in the communication

dated 01-12-2018, stated that the petitioner can be suitably

placed in categories 3(b), 4(c) and 4(d) of the Government

Resolution dated 11-05-1992, 11-04-2008 and 15-03-2010

respectively, prescribing minimum imprisonment of 24 years, the

State has not followed the mandate of the law. There is not even

a whisper as to why the State was not accepting the report

submitted by the learned Judge of the City Civil and Sessions

Court. The order is absolutely unsustainable in law.

4. We allow the criminal writ petition and quash and set aside

the impugned order and direct the State to pass a fresh order in

accordance with the view / opinion expressed by the Presiding

Ofcer under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as

expeditiously as possible and in any event within two weeks.

   ( ABHAY S. WAGHWASE )                         ( MANGESH S. PATIL )
          JUDGE                                        JUDGE


 SPT