Gujarat High Court
Mangubhai vs State on 29 January, 2010
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/2425/2007 1/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 2425 of 2007
=========================================================
MANGUBHAI
DHANJIBHAI PATEL - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
SADHANA SAGAR for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR KARTIK PANDYA, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) : 2,
NOTICE SERVED
for Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 29/01/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Petitioner is a convict. He seeks benefit of government policy of giving remission to certain class of prisoners formulated by resolution dated 02.10.2007. It is not in dispute that as per the policy, the prisoner had to have completed 5 years of sentence. It is the case of the petitioner that he was arrested on 23.09.2007 and thus completed 5 years of sentence on 23.09.2007. On the crucial date, therefore, he was entitled to the benefit of policy of the government. In the affidavit-in-reply, the respondents have, however, highlighted that the petitioner completed 5 years of sentence only on 11.12.2007 since he has not served 5 years of sentence including the set off period as on 01.10.2007. At Annexure R3 to the reply, calculation of the sentence undergone by the petitioner is produced. From the said document, it appears that the petitioner had availed temporary bail, parole, furlough etc. during the period between 23.09.2003 to 02.10.2007. To these details, petitioner has not raised any dispute. I see no error in the decision taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Valsad.
Learned advocate for the petitioner, however, submitted that other prisoners similarly situated have been granted benefits ignoring the period of parole, furlough and temporary bail. There is nothing on record to suggest that the benefit of the government policy has been given to other prisoners interpreting government policy accordingly.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, if the petitioner wishes to make any further representation with details of similar cases having been treated by the government differently, it will be open for him to do so, in which case, such representation shall be considered in accordance with law.
Disposed of accordingly. Notice is discharged.
(Akil Kureshi, J.) menon Top