Whether Govt GR regarding special remission on account of 125th Birth Anniversary of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar is applicable to person convicted of offence of rape or POCSO Act?

  The GR dated 03.06.2017 carves out six categories which have been excluded from the applicability of GR. Apparently, the offence of rape or POCSO Act does not fall in the exceptional category. The learned Trial Court has misread the said GR while opining that due to seriousness of offence, the petitioner is not eligible. Apparently, the reason accorded by the Sessions Judge is not in consonance with the said GR and thus, the denial is unjust and arbitrary.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 579/2023

Nitin s/o Shamraoji Pawnikar,  Vs State of Maharashtra,

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND

MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI , JJ .

DATE : 19.01.2024.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER VINAY JOSHI, J.) :

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. The petitioner has been convicted for the offence

punishable under Sections 376(2)(i)(j) of the Indian Penal Code and

Section 6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act

(‘POCSO Act’), whereby he was sentenced to suffer 10 years of

imprisonment. The petitioner is in Jail from last 8 years. The

petitioner has applied for remission on account of Government

Resolution (‘GR’) dated 03.06.2017. The respondents sought opinion

from the Sessions Judge which being adverse, petitioner has been

denied for grant of remission.

3. The learned APP has opined that the offence punishable

under Section 376((2)(i)(j) of the Indian Penal Code read with

Section 6 of the POCSO Act is quiet serious and thus, petitioner does

not deserve for the benefit of GR dated 03.06.2017.

4. We have examined the GR dated 03.06.2017 which

provides that on account of 125th Birth Anniversary of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, remission is to be accorded to the prisoner for the period specified therein as per term of punishment. The prisoner who have been sentenced for more than five years of imprisonment would be entitled for remission of three months subject to self imposed rider. The GR dated 03.06.2017 carves out six categories which have been excluded from the applicability of GR. Apparently, the offence of rape or POCSO Act does not fall in the exceptional category. The learned Trial Court has misread the said GR while opining that due to seriousness of offence, the petitioner is not eligible. Apparently, the reason accorded by the Sessions Judge is not in consonance with the said GR and thus, the denial is unjust and arbitrary.

5. In view of above, impugned communication dated

06.02.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are

directed to grant benefit of remission to the petitioner in terms of GR

dated 03.06.2017 by imposing suitable conditions.

6. Petition stands disposed of.

7. Rule is made absolute in above terms.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI , J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

Gohane