PINTU Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a convict for the ofences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (' IPC ' for short) and Sections 3 , 4 , 5 of the Protection of Children against Sexual Ofences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'the POCSO Act' for short) has preferred this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for his release on emergency (Covid- 19) parole.

(2.) The petitioner was arrested on 7/12/2013 for the above mentioned ofences and by the judgment and order rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 10 years for the ofences punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 3,4, 5 of the POCSO Act.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was once released on parole for attending marriage on 10/4/2019 and he surrendered on time i.e. on 20/4/2019. Learned counsel invited our attention to the Rule 19 (1) (C) of the "The Maharashtra Prisons (Mumbai Furlough and Parole (Amendment) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Rules" for short) which is extracted in paragraph 8 of this order and especially the proviso thereof to submit that as the petitioner is not convicted under the provisions of MCOC, PMLA, MPID, NDPS, UAPA, the condition precedent to release the petitioner on parole as classifed by the High Powered Committee stands satisfed. In his submission, the beneft of Clause (1) and (2) of Rule 19 is available to the petitioner as POCSO Act is not specifed as a Special Act in the proviso.