Bombay High Court
Dyaneshwar S/O Bhaurao Domewale vs State Of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary Home ... on 28 November, 2023
Author: Vinay Joshi
Bench: Vinay Joshi, M.W. Chandwani
2023:BHC-NAG:16593-DB
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.574 OF 2022
1. Dyaneshwar s/o Bhaurao Domewale C-
6202, Aged about : 57, Occ. Nil, Central
Prison, Nagpur.
... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra, through its
Secretary, Home Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. Superintendent of Prison, Central
Jail, Nagpur, Tehsil and District
Nagpur.
... RESPONDENTS.
_____________________________________________________________
Shri S.R. JaiswaL, Advocate for the petitioner. (appointed.)
Mrs. Tripathi, Addl.P.P. for the State.
______________________________________________________________
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND M.W. CHANDWANI, JJ.
DATED : 28.11.2023.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Vinay Joshi, J.)
RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. The matter is taken up for final disposal by consent of
learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
3. The petitioner has been convicted in the Sessions Trial
No.430 of 1993 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the
Indian Penal Code and sentence to undergo imprisonment for life along
with the fine. The petitioner is in jail from the year 2003. The Petitioner
has applied for State Remission (Rajyamafi) on the occasion of 125 th
Birth Anniversary of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar vide Government
Resolution ('GR') dated 03.06.2017.
4. The respondent no.2 Superintendent of Prison, Nagpur has
obtained opinion of the Sessions Judge on the said application.
However, as the learned Sessions Judge gave adverse opinion vide
communication dated 25.01.2021, the petitioner was denied from the
benefit of GR dated 03.06.2017. The State has filed a reply-affidavit
stating that the opinion of the Sessions Judge is binding, and thus, the
remission has not been granted.
5. We have gone through the opinion of the learned Sessions
Judge dated 25.01.2021. The learned Sessions Judge, has stated about
the gravity of offence and expressed that due to cruel act of the
petitioner, he is not entitled for remission. Bare perusal of GR dated
03.06.2017 discloses that benefit of the GR shall be accorded to all
prisoners for the period specified therein subject to the exceptions
carved out in Clauses (i) to (vi) embodied therein. Either gravity of the
offence or the cruel manner has not been categorized as an exception in
the GR.
6. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State fairly conceded
that the case of the petitioner does not fall in either of the exceptional
category. In these circumstances, merely on the basis of opinion of the
Sessions Judge, which is not in accordance with the GR, the prisoner's
right cannot be curtailed.
7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed.
8. We hereby quash and set aside the impugned opinion of the
learned Sessions Judge dated 25.01.2021. The concerned Authorities
are directed to take appropriate decision within two weeks, if the
petitioner is otherwise found eligible for remission. The concerned
Authority shall communicate the decision to this Court within two
weeks.
9. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to costs.
10. Fees of the appointed Counsel be paid as per the Rules.
(M.W. CHANDWANI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Trupti
Signed by: Trupti D. Agrawal
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 30/11/2023 17:22:24
