Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shankar Vitthal Khare, a convict serving life imprisonment for murder under Section 302 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for robbery under Section 392 IPC, along with a separate conviction under the POCSO Act, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. He sought quashing of the order dated 20/12/2020 rejecting his application for emergency parole under the State Government Notification dated 08/05/2020 issued during the COVID-19 pandemic. The rejection order stated that the petitioner was convicted under Section 395 IPC (dacoity), which was not the actual offence. The petitioner argued that since he was not convicted under Section 395 IPC, the rejection was erroneous. The Court examined the record and found that the petitioner was convicted for murder (Section 302 IPC) and robbery (Section 392 IPC), and had already undergone the sentence for the POCSO case. The Court noted that the Government Notification dated 08/05/2020 provides for emergency parole to decongest prisons during the pandemic, but excludes convicts sentenced for offences under Chapters VI and XVI of IPC or under special laws like POCSO. Since the petitioner was convicted for murder (Chapter XVI) and sentenced to life imprisonment, he falls within the exceptions. The Court held that the mere incorrect mention of Section 395 IPC in the rejection order does not entitle him to parole. The petition was dismissed, and the rule was discharged.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Emergency Parole - COVID-19 Pandemic - Government Notification dated 08/05/2020 - Conviction under Section 395 IPC - The petitioner, convicted for murder (Section 302 IPC) and robbery (Section 392 IPC) and under POCSO Act, sought emergency parole. The rejection order erroneously mentioned conviction under Section 395 IPC (dacoity). The Court held that the petitioner is not entitled to emergency parole as he is convicted for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, which falls within the exceptions of the Government Notification. The error in mentioning Section 395 IPC does not entitle him to parole. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, convicted for offences under Sections 302 and 392 IPC and under the POCSO Act, is entitled to emergency parole under the State Government Notification dated 08/05/2020, despite the rejection order citing conviction under Section 395 IPC.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged.
Law Points
- Emergency parole
- COVID-19 pandemic
- Government Notification dated 08/05/2020
- Section 395 IPC
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 392 IPC
- POCSO Act
- life imprisonment
- dacoity
- murder
- robbery
- parole eligibility
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (02) 1
Criminal Writ Petition No.73 of 2021
T.V. Nalawade, M.G. Sewlikar
Mr. R.A. Jaiswal (for petitioner), Mr. S.J. Salgare (Addl. Public Prosecutor for State)
Shankar S/o Vitthal Khare
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal Writ Petition seeking quashing of order rejecting emergency parole and direction to release on emergency parole.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of order dated 20/12/2020 and release on emergency parole under Government Notification dated 08/05/2020.
Filing Reason
Rejection of emergency parole application on the ground of conviction under Section 395 IPC, which the petitioner claims is incorrect.
Previous Decisions
Order dated 20/12/2020 by respondent rejecting emergency parole.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to emergency parole under the Government Notification dated 08/05/2020 despite being convicted for murder and robbery?
Whether the erroneous mention of Section 395 IPC in the rejection order entitles the petitioner to parole?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he was not convicted under Section 395 IPC, so the rejection order is erroneous.
Respondent/State submitted that the petitioner is convicted for murder (Section 302 IPC) and robbery (Section 392 IPC), and is serving life imprisonment, which falls within the exceptions of the Government Notification.
Ratio Decidendi
A convict sentenced to life imprisonment for murder under Section 302 IPC is not entitled to emergency parole under the Government Notification dated 08/05/2020, as the notification excludes convicts sentenced for offences under Chapter XVI of IPC. The erroneous mention of Section 395 IPC in the rejection order does not confer any right to parole.
Judgment Excerpts
The submissions made and the record show that the petitioner was convicted in two separate cases, like Special Case (POCSO) No. 16/2019 and he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of six months for offence punishable under the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act...
The submissions made and the record show that the petitioner was also convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable U/Ss. 302 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code in other case.
The reasons for rejection of emergency parole are as follows: (I) The petitioner is convicted for offence punishable U/S. 395 of I.P.C
Procedural History
The petitioner filed an application for emergency parole under Government Notification dated 08/05/2020. The respondent rejected the application by order dated 20/12/2020. The petitioner then filed the present Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, which was heard and disposed of on 05/02/2021.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 392, 395
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act):
