Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

A Division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Madhav J. Jamdar set aside and quashed an order of the Home Department of Government of Maharashtra, which denied remission to convict after 22 years by stating that the remission can only be allowed after competition of 24 years.

The above matter pertains to a case wherein a member of a trade union had died due to a dispute and rivalry between two trade unions i.e, Bhartiya Kamgar Sena and the Mumbai Labour Union. The deceased was a member of the Mumbai Labour Union, and after the case was tried by the trial court, the accused from the Bhartiya Kamgar Sena was convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life, in 2007.

The advocate for the petitioner argued that the guidelines stipulated for 22 years for a 'murder resulting from trade union activities and business rivalry'. 

The court while setting aside the order noted that the factual position clearly shows that the incident in question took place due to the actions of trade unions. The court further stated that 4(d) is for a murder committed by more than one person and in the present case there were 3 people, however, 4(c) is more specific and deals with murder resulting from trade union activities.

The High Court referred to the order of the Apex Court in the case of the State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Jagdish (2010) 4 SCC 216 and the convict is to be given the benefit of the principle of beneficial policy.

The court while quashing and setting aside the order further noted that

“Even if, it is assumed that the petitioners’ case falls under both the categories namely category no. 4 (c) and category no. 4 (d) of 2010 Guidelines, then also, it is clear that more beneficial category i.e. category no. 4 (c) will apply to the Petitioners’ case.”

Case Title: Uday S/o Dhuka Sutar versus State of Maharashtra & Anr.