1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.148 OF 2010 Pratapsingh Sadhusingh Nihang @ Chhatri, Convict No.5712, Central Prison, Aurangabad ..PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT Mr B.S. Kudale, Advocate (appointed) for the petitioner; Mr K.B. Chaudhari, A.P.P. for the respondent. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE : 6th September, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER PV. HARDAS, J.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. A communication sent by the petitioner through jail came to be registered as Criminal Writ Petition and we had accordingly appointed 2 Shri B.S. Kudale, learned Counsel to represent the petitioner in this petition before us. In this petition, the limited grievance which the petitioner makes is that he be released prematurely by giving him the remission as per Rules. 3. In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondents have filed their affidavit in reply and in the affidavit in reply at paragraph 4 it is stated that the petitioner has earned total remission of seven years, three months and nine days till 31.3.2010 and accordingly is likely to be released on 1.11.2010. Undisputedly, the petitioner has been convicted by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge at Nanded in Sessions Case No. 153 of 1994 for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. Shri Kudle, learned Counsel appointed on behalf of the petitioner has urged before us that the respondents have calculated remission only till 31.3.2010 and if further remission is taken into consideration, the expected date of release of the petitioner is likely to be curtailed and the petitioner would be entitled to be released much earlier than 1.11.2010. Accordingly we had requested Shri K.B. Chaudhari, learned A.P.P. to obtain necessary instructions and upon necessary instructions Shri Chaudhari states that the remission which is calculated is upto 31.10.2010 and the petitioner has earned total remission of 2673 days and is, therefore, likely to be released on 1.11.2010, subject to the good 3 behaviour of the petitioner. We accept the aforesaid statement as an undertaking to the Court. In the light of the fact that the respondents have correctly calculated the remission to which the petitioner would be entitled to in law, according to us, no interference is necessary. 5. We accordingly dismiss this petition. Rule stands discharged. We quantify the fees payable to the learned Counsel appointed on behalf of the petitioner at Rs.1,500/-. ( A.V. POTDAR, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) amj/criwp148.10