VIPIN BANDUJI KAMBLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner who is the prisoner undergoing a sentence of rigorous imprisonment of ten years with fine of Rs.10,000.00 for the offences punishable under Sec. 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "the Code" for short) and Sec. 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short "the POCSO Act") has preferred this petition for seeking the benefit of a remission in view of the Government Resolution dtd. 03/06/2017 declaring remission to all the state convicts on the occasion of 125th Birth Anniversary of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar. The proposal was forwarded by the Jail authorities to the District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha and requested to communicate its report so that the remission of three months can be granted to the petitioner. However, the District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha issued a communication dtd. 23/07/2021 to the jail authorities and opined that "legally it would not be proper to grant remission to the petitioner". It is the contention of the petitioner that no reason is assigned by the District Judge to the jail authorities for rejecting the claim of the petitioner for remission of sentence. Mere the reason of seriousness of offence is assigned which is not a ground to deny the remission to the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner had undergone eight years of his period of punishment with a good conduct in the prison. He does not fall under the categories of prisoners to whom the remission is not extended. As per the Government Resolution certain categories of prisoners are excluded and the petitioner does not fall under such category. Therefore, the impugned communication dtd. 27/03/2021 by which the benefit of remission was rejected is illegal, improper, arbitrary and deserves to be set aside.

(3.) In response to the notice, the State has opposed the petition on the ground that the offence alleged is serious in nature and the District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha opined that this is not the fit case to grant remission, therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.