PRASHANT SAMAR MAZI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Nargolkar, learned counsel appointed for petitioner, learned APP for Respondent-State finally. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, with consent of parties.

(2.) Perused the impugned order dated 17th November, 2017, which categorize petitioner in Category 3(b) of 2010 Guidelines and puts him in 26 years category. The petitioner contends that this cateogrization is basically because of similar order dated 18th August, 2016, passed in case of co- convict, which puts co-convict in the same category. According to him, that order was not passed after due application of mind.

(3.) Learned APP, on the other hand relies upon the judgment dated 29th July, 2013, delivered by this Court in Criminal Appeal 582 of 2007, upholding the conviction, to urge that Guidelines 3(d) is an apt provision. He submits that other heads in 1992 Guidelines are not relevant. Guideline 5 is about murders committed by professional criminals and State Government has not recognized petitioner as a professional criminal. Without prejudice, he has invited our attention to 2010 Guideline also. According to him if 2010 Guidelines are to be used, Guideline 4 which deals with murders for other reasons and its Sub-clause (e) which deals with murder committed by dacoits and robbers in the act of committing dacoities and robberies is attracted. He pointed out that even in this head, quantum of punishment does not undergo any change. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of petition.