It is thus apparent that except the
prisoners of these categories the rest of the
prisoners are entitled to the benefit of
remission under this Government Resolution
dated 3rd June, 2017.
4] Ex facie, the petitioner, who is a
prisoner undergoing a sentence of 23 years
imprisonment, does not fall into any of these
categories. Still, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge in his opinion dated 17th July,
2017, has overlooked these aspects and for
the reasons de hors the Government Resolution
has opined that the petitioner is not
entitled to any remission. He seems to have
misdirected himself in considering the
gravity of the crime when the Government
Resolution does not admit of any such
parameter for extending the benefit. Even a
life convict is entitled to remission to the
extent of three months. It is also apparent
that the learned Additional Sessions Judge
for the reasons best known to him has not at
all referred to the Government Resolution
dated 3rd June, 2017. Had his attention been
brought to it, we are sure the learned Judge
would not have given a negative opinion. Be
that as it may, the opinion expressed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge in
ignorance of or by overlooking the Government
Resolution is clearly faulty.
5] In the light of discussion herein
above, the Petition is partly allowed. The
matter is remitted back to the Additional
Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, for reconsideration.
The Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, to
reconsider the entire issue,
keeping in view the Government Resolution
dated 3rd June, 2017, and take decision as
expeditiously as possible, however, within
eight weeks from the date of receipt of this
order.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1710 OF 2018
Santosh s/o. Suryabhan Kale Vs The State of Maharashtra,
CORAM: S.S.SHINDE & R.G.AVACHAT,JJ.
Pronounced on : 08.02.2019
JUDGMENT: [Per S.S.Shinde, J.]:
Print Page