SANTOSH @ SONU BALRAM JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Respondents waive service. Since this matter comes from prison, the Registry was requested to appoint an Advocate and Mr.Daulat Khamkar, Advocate was appointed for the petitioner prisoner.

(2.) The learned APP appears on behalf of respondent state.

(3.) The petitioner invokes jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to obtain premature release on the footing that he has completed 14 years of imprisonment. In terms of the order dated 30th October 2012, the petitioner cannot be released until he completes 26 years of imprisonment. The petitioner challenges this order by urging that at best, he can be kept in custody for 22 years, including remission but the impugned order determines the period of 26 years and that is contrary to law. The petitioner has given instance and illustration of one convict No.7092 Prakash Vitthal Kharat. According to the petitioner prisoner, even this prisoner was meted out with similar treatment but later on when he approached this Court by filing a criminal writ petition, the State released him on completion of 22 years imprisonment, inclusive of remission. The petitioner prisoner places his case on par with the said Prakash Kharat.