1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 187 OF 2011 (Ramesh Kelbaji Raut vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mrs. Ketki Joshi, APP for the respondents. ….. CORAM : MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & M.L. TAHALIYANI, JJ. MARCH 23, 2011. Heard Mrs. Joshi, learned APP for the respondents. The petitioner i.e. original accused has preferred this petition through jail. The case of the petitioner is that as per the guidelines of premature release framed by the Government, he has been placed in the category wherein he has to undergo 26 years of imprisonment including the remission period. The prayer of the petitioner is that the period of 26 years be reduced. By the judgment and order dated 08.05.1998 passed by the Sessions Judge, Amravati, in Sessions Trial No. 43 of 1995, the petitioner was convicted under Sections 302 & 498-A of Indian Penal Code. For the offence punishable under Section 302, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine. As 2 the petitioner completed 12 years of actual imprisonment, his case was referred to the Government for deciding the actual category for premature release. After going through the relevant papers, the Government decided that the petitioner falls under category 1(d) of the Guidelines where crime is committed relating to sexual matters or arising out of relations with women, dowry deaths and other forms of bride killing with premeditation. As per this category, the petitioner would be entitled to be released after 26 years including remission subject to a minimum of 14 years of actual imprisonment including set off period. We have perused the judgment and order whereby the petitioner came to be convicted. The prosecution case briefly is that, the deceased Sindhubai was married to the petitioner. Venubai was the mother- in-law of Sindhubai and Laxmibai was the sister-in-law of Sindhubai. There used to be quarrel between Sindhubai, Laxmibai and Venubai. On the day of incident, in the morning at about 9.00 AM, again quarrel took place between Sindhubai on one side and Laxmibai and Venubai on the other side. Laxmibai and Venubai brought a can containing kerosene from the house and poured kerosene on Sindhubai's person. The petitioner Ramesh was there, he lit a matchstick and set Sindhubai on fire. On account of this, Sindhubai received 72% burn injuries. Looking to the facts of the case, there does 3 not appear to be any premeditation on the part of any of the accused persons including the petitioner. In such case, the petitioner would fall in category 1(c) i.e. where the crime is committed without premeditation. The said category provides for 24 years of imprisonment including remission. As the petitioner has been clearly placed in the wrong category i.e. 1(d) by the order dated 04.08.2009, the Government order dated 04.08.2009 placing him under category (d) is quashed and set aside and the petitioner be placed under category 1(c) of the guidelines. He be released from prison on completing the period as per category 1(c). Office to communicate this order to the petitioner who is in Amravati Central Prison. Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms. JUDGE JUDGE *GS.