HARJEETSINGH NIRANJANSINGH JABBAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner takes exception to the order passed by the Desk Officer, Home Department, Government of Maharashtra, dated 7 th September, 2009 bearing No. RLP 1009/397/CR-475/PRS-3, categorising the petitioner in Category No. 5(a) of the Guidelines dated 11 th May, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the Guidelines of 1992 ) framed by the Government of Maharashtra for premature release under the 14-Year Rule of prisoners undergoing the life sentence.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the Appropriate Authority ought to have decided the petitioner's case on the basis of Guidelines dated 16 th November, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Guidelines of 1978 ), wherein the maximum period of imprisonment specified for the prisoners, who are convicted of murders during dacoities and robberies, as 22 years.

(3.) Briefly stated, the petitioner was arrested on 2 nd December, 1994 by Bhoiwada Police Station in connection with C.R. No. 399 of 1994. The petitioner was tried by the Sessions Court, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 380 of 1995. The Sessions Court, by judgment and order dated 4 th August, 1998, found the petitioner guilty of the said offences, and, accordingly, convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life in connection with offence under Section 302 and rigorous imprisonment for seven years in connection with offence under Section 397 of I.P.C. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. According to the petitioner, by the time the present petition came to be filed, he has already completed 15 years of actual imprisonment, inclusive of under-trial period, and 22 years of imprisonment, with remissions. On that basis, he claims that he was entitled for premature release on the basis of Guidelines formulated by the Home Department on 16 th November, 1978, as the maximum period of imprisonment, including remissions, for the murder committed by prisoners during dacoities and robberies is only 22 years as per clause 4 of the said Guidelines. However, the proposal of the petitioner was considered by the Appropriate Authority by applying the Guidelines of 1992 and that too by categorising the case of the petitioner under Category 5(a) of the said Guidelines, which provides for total imprisonment period for the same offence committed by prisoners up to 26 years. In this backdrop, the petitioner filed the present petition challenging the decision of the Appropriate Authority dated 7 th September, 2009 and prayed for direction against the authority to consider the claim of the petitioner as covered under clause 4 of the Guidelines of 1978 to release the petitioner from prison forthwith, as he has already served 22 years of imprisonment, with remissions. It is also asserted that at best the petitioner's case would be covered by Category 3 of the Guidelines of 1992, in which case, the total period of imprisonment, including remissions, would be up to 24 years.