Bombay High Court
Hariom S/O. Babarao Wakode vs State Of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary, ... on 23 August, 2023
Bench: Vinay Joshi, Valmiki Sa Menezes
2023:BHC-NAG:12572-DB
1 913-WP-309-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 309 OF 2023
SHRI HARIOM S/O BABARAO WAKODE
Vrs.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S. G. Joshi, Advocate (Appointed) for petitioner.
Mrs. N. R. Tripathi, A. P. P. for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
CORAM: VINAY JOSHI AND
VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.
DATE : 23/08/2023.
1. Heard.
2. The petitioner was put on trial for the offence
punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned Magistrate acquitted the petitioner vide
Judgment and order dated 18/02/2015. The State came
in appeal wherein the learned Sessions Judge vide order
dated 15/06/2022 reversed the Trial Court's Judgment
and consequently, convicted the appellant for the offence
charged and sentenced him to suffer Rigorous
Imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-
with default clause. The petitioner has challenged the said
order in Criminal Revision Application (CRA)
No.138/2022, but could not succeed as the revision was
dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20/06/2022. The
petitioner carried the matter to the Hon'ble Supreme
2 913-WP-309-23.odt
Court, however, the Hon'ble Supreme Court declined to
intervene vide order dated 01/08/2022.
3. In above scenario, the petitioner has come to
this Court with an urge to grant benefit of plea bargaining
in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case
of Suo Motu Writ Petition (CRL) No.4/2021 dated
14/09/2022. Particularly, petitioner has emphasized
Guideline No.6.3 for seeking the benefit, which is
reproduced as below :-
"6.3. If the convict is in jail and has undergone 40%
of the sentence, his case can be taken up by the
District Legal Services Authority. The District Legal
Services Authority, through a lawyer of sufficient
seniority, can counsel the accused that if he is willing
to accept his guilt, request can be made to the High
Court to reduce the sentence or for releasing the
convict on probation of good conduct for the
remainder of the sentence. It should be clearly
disclosed that the said acceptance of guilt is only for
the purposes of closing the matter and in case the
High Court is not inclined to accept the plea, then the
matter would be considered by the High Court on its
own merits and his plea would not come in the way of
hearing of the appeal on merits."
4. While considering the large number of under
trials, the Hon'ble Supreme Court gave suggestion that
where the convicts have undergone the sentence, and
3 913-WP-309-23.odt
sentenced in jail, the above Condition No.6.3 makes
petitioner entitlled to opt for plea bargaining before High
Court, if he has already undergone 40 % of the sentence.
On perusal of said clause, it reveals that the said guideline
can be resorted during pendency of appeal before this
Court, however, in case at hand, admittedly, this Court has
disposed the revision as well as the matter has attained
finality by dismissal of CRA by Supreme Court.
5. In the circumstances, we are unable to accept
the petitioner's contention to consider the urge for plea
bargaining on the premise of Clause No.6.3 contained in
the said decision.
6. In view of that, petition being devoid of merit,
stands disposed.
7. Fees of Shri S. G. Joshi, Advocate (Appointed)
for petitioner be quantified and given as per the rules.
[VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.] [VINAY JOSHI, J.]
Choulwar
Signed by: V.M. Choulwar (VMC)
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 24/08/2023 15:01:07
