| |
CDJ 2026 BHC 069
|
| Court : High Court of Judicature at Bombay |
| Case No : Criminal Writ Petition No. 255 of 2025 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. GADKARI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM C. CHANDAK |
| Parties : Gangaram Magan Chavan, (Through Jail) Versus State of Maharashtra |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Manisha Devkar, appointed Advocate. For the Respondent: Amit A. Palkar APP. |
| Date of Judgment : 12-01-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Indian Penal Code - Section 302 -
Comparative Citation:
2026 BHC-AS 2183, |
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules / Orders Mentioned:
- Section 302 of the IPC
- Criminal Appeal No.61 of 2009
- Sessions Case No.778 of 2007
- Judgment and Order dated 17th December, 2008
- Judgment dated 12th December, 2013
- Order dated 13th August, 2024
- Guidelines of 15th March, 2010 issued by the Home Department
- Category No.2(c) of the Guidelines of 15th March, 2010
2. Catch Words:
Not mentioned.
3. Summary:
The petitioner, convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for burning his wife, sought re‑categorisation to a 22‑year sentence category while serving life imprisonment. The conviction and life sentence were upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge and later by the High Court on appeal. The Home Department’s competent authority placed him in Category 2(c) of the 2010 Guidelines, which prescribes a 26‑year term for crimes involving exceptional violence or death by burns. The court examined the facts, including the petitioner’s intoxication and the brutal nature of the offence, and found the departmental categorisation appropriate. Consequently, the petition for a different categorisation was found without merit.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed |
| Judgment :- |
|
Oral Judgment:
A.S. Gadkari, J.
1) The Petitioner has sent this Petition through jail seeking relief of placing him in a category of convicts to undergo sentence of 22 years for the crime, for which he is undergoing sentence.
2) Heard Ms. Devkar, learned Advocate appointed by the Legal Aid Committee, High Court, Mumbai and Mr. Palkar, learned APP for the State. Perused the record.
3) The Petitioner is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life by Judgment and Order dated 17th December, 2008, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai in Sessions Case No.778 of 2007, for commission of murder of his wife Anjudevi by pouring kerosene on her person and set her on fire with a burning candle. The said act of burning of his wife was committed by the Petitioner on 22nd July, 2007 at about 9.30 p.m. in his house. The deceased suffered 79% superficial to deep burns.
3.1) P.W. No.3 Dr. Chauhan, who performed autopsy on Anjudevi has opined that, the cause of death of deceased was Septicemia due to superficial to deep burns.
4) Appeal preferred by the Petitioner bearing Criminal Appeal No.61 of 2009 against the said Judgment and Order of conviction, has been dismissed by the co-ordinate bench of this Court by its Judgment dated 12th December, 2013.
5) The competent Authority of Home Department of Government of Maharashtra after taking into consideration the facts of the case has passed an Order dated 13th August, 2024, placing the Petitioner in category No.2(c) of the Guidelines of 15th March, 2010 issued by the Home Department.
5.1) Category 2(c) of the guidelines of 15th March, 2010 reads as under:-
Annexure-I
Category
| Sub Category
| Categorization of crime
| Period of imprisonment to be undergone including remission subject to a minimum of 14 years of actual imprisonment including set off period.
| 1.
| | | | 2.
| | OFFENCES RELATING TO CRIME AGAINST WOMEN AND MINORS.
| | | (a)
| ....
| | | (c)
| Where the crime is committed with exceptional violence and or with brutality or death of victim due to burns
| 26
|
6) A bare perusal of record clearly reveals that, the Petitioner was addicted to liquor and used to come home under its influence. He used to quarrel with her wife (deceased) on petty counts. On the date of incident, i.e. on 22nd July, 2007, the Petitioner returned home in a fully intoxicated condition. The deceased requested the Petitioner to bring medicine for their son who was not feeling well. The Petitioner got enraged and started assaulting his wife. Wife of the Petitioner (deceased) told him that, ‘you have money to drink liquor but not to bring medicine for the child’ . After hearing the said thing, the Petitioner poured kerosene on the person of the deceased and ignited her with the burning candle. The deceased suffered 79% of the burn injuries and subsequently died in the hospital while undergoing treatment.
7) Considering the act of the Petitioner, we find that the competent Authority of Home Department of Government of Maharashtra has rightly placed the Petitioner in category No.2(c) of the Guidelines of 15th March, 2010 issued by the Home Department and therefore the request of the Petitioner to place him in a category for which the sentence of 22 years of imprisonment is prescribed, cannot be acceded to.
8) In view of the above discussion, we find no merits in the Petition and is accordingly dismissed.
|
| |
