Bombay High Court
Sunil Laxman Ghode vs State Of Maharashtra on 30 June, 2025
Author: A. S. Gadkari
Bench: A. S. Gadkari
025:BHC-AS:1
DDR 13. wp 58-25 & IA.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 58 OF 2025
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2223 OF 2025
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 58 OF 2025
Sunil Laxman Ghode )
[Convict No.C/532], )
Age 44 years, )
R/o. N-31/A-1/1/2, Vijay Nagar, CIDCO, )
Nashik, District Nashik. )
(At present confined and undergoing )
imprisonment in Nashik Road Open Prison) ) ..Petitioner/Applicant
Vs.
1. The State Of Maharashtra )
through the Secretary, Home Department, )
(Prison - 3), Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. )
2. The Additional Director General )
of Police and Inspector General of Prisons, )
Correctional Services, Maharashtra State, )
Pune - 1. )
3. The Advisory Board Committee )
(Sited Members in Advisory Board )
Committee to decide premature release )
proposals) )
1/5
DDR 13. wp 58-25 & IA.doc
4. The Superintendent of Jail, )
Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik. ) ..Respondents
_______________________________
Mr. Karthik Rajasekhar for the Petitioner/Applicant through Legal Aid.
Smt. Prajakta P. Shinde, APP for Respondent No.1-State.
Smt. Suvarna J. Chorge, Jailor Gr.-II, Nashik Jail, Nashik.
_______________________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 30th JUNE, 2025.
JUDGMENT (Per : A. S. Gadkari, J.) :
-
1) By this Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the
Petitioner (Original Accused No.2) has impugned Order dated 29 th August
2024, passed by the Competent Authority of Home Department of
Government of Maharashtra thereby placing Petitioner in Category 4(d) of
15th March 2010 Guidelines for premature release under the "14 Year Rule"
of prisoners serving life sentence (said 2010 Guidelines). By categorizing
the Petitioner and placing him in Category 4(d) of said Guidelines, the
Petitioner has to undergo twenty-four years of imprisonment including set
off period.
2) Heard Mr. Karthik Rajasekhar, learned Advocate for the
Petitioner appointed by the Legal Aid Committee and Smt. P. P. Shinde,
learned APP for Respondent No.1-State. Perused entire record produced
before us.
3) It is the case of the prosecution that, the sister of Petitioner was
DDR 13. wp 58-25 & IA.doc
having love affair with one Raju Kulthe. Raju Kulthe was friend of deceased
Kapil Lad. On the date and time of incident, Accused No.1 i.e. father of
Petitioner, Petitioner and two of his other friends were searching Raju
Kulthe. They enquired with Kapil Lad about the whereabouts of Raju
Kulthe, however, he did not divulge them anything. The accused persons
therefore abducted Kapil Lad and during transit committed his murder and
decamped his body near Daruwala Petrol Pump, Chandori, District Nashik.
It is the further case of prosecution that, the daughter of Accused No.1 and
sister of the Petitioner was already married and was having illicit relations
with Raju Kulthe.
4) The trial Court by its Judgment and Order dated 31 st March
2008 was pleased to convict the Original Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 under
Sections 302, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced
them to suffer life imprisonment.
4.1) Criminal Appeal No. 444 of 2008 preferred by the Appellant
has been turned down by this Court by Judgment and Order dated 10 th
September 2014, upholding the conviction and sentence of the Petitioner.
5) The facts mentioned in Paragraph No.3 are deciphered from
the record and are admitted facts.
6) By the impugned order, the Petitioner has been put in Category
4 (d) of said 2010 Guidelines.
6.1) Category 4(d) of said 2010 Guidelines reads as under:-
DDR 13. wp 58-25 & IA.doc
4. MURDERS FOR OTHER REASONS
(a) ............
(b) ...........
(c) ..........
(d) Murder committed by more than one
person / group of persons.
6.2) Category 3 (b) of said 2010 Guidelines reads as under :-
3. MURDERS ARISING OUT OF LAND
DISPUTE, FAMILY FEUDS, FAMILY PRESTIGE AND
SUPERSTITION.
(a) ............
(b) Crime committed as above with premeditation,
either individually or by a gang.
7) As noted earlier, perusal of record clearly indicates that, the
Petitioner along with his father and other accused persons committed
murder of Kapil Lad with a belief to honour family prestige, as the father
(Accused No.1) and Petitioner (Accused No.2) were against the love affair
of their daughter/sister with Raju Kulthe. Therefore, according to us, the
case of Petitioner would fall under Category 3(b) of said 2010 Guidelines
and not under Category 4(d) thereof.
8) In view of the above, the impugned Order dated 29 th August
2024 needs to be partly quashed and modified to the extent of placing the
Petitioner in Category 3(b) of said 2010 Guidelines.
9) Hence, the following order.
DDR 13. wp 58-25 & IA.doc
ORDER
1. Petitioner is directed to be placed in the
Category of 3(b) of the Guidelines for premature release
under the "14 Year Rule" of prisoners serving life
sentence, dated 15th March 2010.
2. As per the record, the Petitioner as of today
has already undergone twenty-three years, four months
and nine days of imprisonment including remissions and
in view of placing him in Category 3(b), he is required to
be released from jail forthwith.
3. Petitioner, therefore, be released from the
jail immediately on production of an authenticated copy
of the operative part of this Judgment, if not required in
any other case/crime.
10) Petition is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms.
11) In view of the disposal of Petition, Interim Application No.2223
of 2025 does not survive and is also disposed off.
12) All the concerned to act on an authenticated copy of the
operative part of the Judgment.
(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)
Signed by: Diksha Rane
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 22/07/2025 19:59:34
