3 min readMay 3, 2026 09:47 PM IST
First published on: May 3, 2026 at 09:47 PM IST
Expressing shock over the non-release of the rape convict who had served 31 years in prison, despite 53 days having passed since the court order, the Kolhapur circuit bench of the Bombay High Court held that this violated his fundamental right to life and personal liberty and ordered his immediate release.
The HC had on March 7 ordered the release of the 65-year-old man on completion of 30 years’ imprisonment, including remission, for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) of the IPC, punishable for gang rape.
Remission is reduction of jail period granted to prisoners on grounds of good conduct, nature of offence or special schemes, among others.
A bench of Justices Madhav S Jamdar and Pravin S Patil on April 30 passed an order on a plea by over 65-year-old convict, who was initially sentenced to death penalty by sessions court, a decision later confirmed by the High Court before the Supreme Court modified it to life term in a rape and murder case. He had challenged the Maharashtra government’s decision of September 2025.
The state home department had directed him to be released after completing a 30-year jail term, including remission, but also required him to undergo an additional 10-year sentence for gang rape.
On March 7, another bench led by Justice Jamdar passed a verdict that partly allowed his writ petition. The bench confirmed that he shall be released after completing 30-year term including remission, but, set aside the state’s further direction of undergoing 10 years of imprisonment under Section 376(2)(g) of the IPC stating that it “cannot be sustained in law”.
On April 30, the bench noted that the petitioner had not yet been released.
“This is a shocking case where, by order dated March 7, 2026, we directed that the petitioner shall be released upon completion of 30 years of imprisonment, including remission.”
Justice Jamdar, for the bench, observed, “In fact, the petitioner has completed 31 years of actual imprisonment, and in total has undergone 36 years of imprisonment, including remission. The said order dated March 7, 2026, has not been complied with till date.”
The state government lawyer reasoned that authorities had granted approval to challenge the March 7 order before the Supreme Court.
However, the HC bench noted, “It is clear that till date even a Special Leave Petition (SLP) has not been filed (in the SC). About 53 days have elapsed since the passing of the order. The conduct of the respondent State of Maharashtra is in violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.”
Therefore, the bench directed authorities to “immediately release the petitioner, if he has completed 30 years of imprisonment, including remission,” and sought compliance with its order on May 4.
The HC noted that based on the title to the transferred shares, BRH pledged them with HDFC Bank to avail a loan facility. (File Photo) 
Share
