:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 186 OF 2008 Heeralal Ramprasad Agarwal ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr. Vinayak V. Katti, Advocate appointed for petitioner. Mr. A.S. Gadkari, APP for State. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & J. H. BHATIA,JJ. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & J. H. BHATIA,JJ. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & J. H. BHATIA,JJ. Dated: June 12, 2008. Dated: June 12, 2008. Dated: June 12, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Katti, the learned Advocate appointed for the petitioner. The petition was received through Jail and prays for early release on the ground that he has undergone the sentence period of 18 years. A copy of the judgment and order dated 19/12/1984 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Pune has been placed before us by Mr.Gadkari, the learned APP and it is clear that in Sessions Case No. 131 of 1984, the petitioner has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. The petitioner :2: was arrested on 18/4/1984 and was not released on bail during the trial. He now claims that on 15/8/1997 India celebrated Golden Jubilee of the Independence Day and on that count prisoners were given a remission of 720 days. As per the petitioner he has been deprived of the said concession. 2. Shri Santosh Tukaram Ghadge, Section Officer, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai has filed an affidavit-in-reply and has pointed out that the petitioner was granted furlough leave for 14 days from 9/7/1996 and he was to surrender to the jail on 24/7/1996. However, the petitioner did not surrender and he over stayed for 1911 days and was arrested by the police on 17/10/2001 so as to be admitted to the jail. On account of this unauthorised over stay for almost five and half years, he was denied the remission granted on the eve of Golden Jubilee Celebration. We, therefore, do not find any error or perversity in the decision taken by the State Government denying the said remission to the petitioner. :3: 3. The affidavit filed by Shri Ghadge further states that perhaps the petitioner may be eligible to be released sometimes in November, 2009, but subject to his good conduct during the remaining period while in jail. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to show his exemplary behaviour so as to enable him to be released in November, 2009. 4. So far as this petition is concerned, it fails and the same is hereby rejected. 5. The Advocate’s fees for the petitioner is quantified at Rs.500/-. (J.H. Bhatia, J.) (J.H. Bhatia, J.) (J.H. Bhatia, J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)