Mumbai: The Supreme Court on Monday stayed till July 15 the order of remission granted by Bombay High Court to gangster turned politician Arun Gawli, who was sentenced to life in prison in 2012 for murder of Shiv Sena leader Kamlakar Jamsandekar.
A vacation bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Sandeep Mehta also issued notice to Gawli while hearing a special leave petition (SLP) filed by the Maharashtra government challenging the order of the Nagpur bench of the HC.
The Nagpur bench of the HC, on April 5, said that Gawli is “entitled” to benefits of the remission policy and hence directed the authorities to “pass consequential order” in that regard. It observed that the convicts under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) cannot be excluded from availing the benefits of the 2006 remission policy if they are entitled to it. The HC passed the order on a petition by Arun Gawli seeking early release from prison.
Senior advocate Raja Thakare, appearing for the State government, urged the court to stay the HC order saying that Gawli is a “hardened criminal turned politician”, who is serving life term in a murder case and is convicted under provisions of MCOCA.
Gawli was convicted under MCOCA and sentenced to life in prison on August 31, 2012, for Jamsandekar’s murder. He has already spent 14 years in prison. The 65-year-old was certified as weak by the Medical Board.
The state government formulated policies for premature or early release of convicts based on different criteria, including good behaviour and number of years spent behind bars. These policies are revised periodically.
In 2006, the remission policy was revised which provided for the early release of life convicts who have served 14 years of actual imprisonment, reached the age of 65, and are physically weak. However, the policy specifies that it would not be applicable to those convicted under social Acts like MPDA, TADA, NDPS, etc.
In 2015, the policy was amended to exclude its application to convicts under MCOCA. The State’s SLP contended that the high court “exceeded its jurisdiction” in allowing Gawli’s remission plea as Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure “explicitly provides the power to suspend or remit a sentence to the ‘Appropriate Government’.”
Besides, the HC failed to take into consideration the remission guidelines dated December 1, 2015, which “explicitly exclude convicts under the MPDA, MCOCA, and NDPS Acts”, the State’s SLP read.
“The observation made by the Hon'ble High Court regarding the exclusion of the MCOC Act in the 2006 policy is misinterpreted, as evidenced by the notification of 01.12.2015, where TADA replaced MCOCA, and the provisions of TADA and MCOCA are analogous. This clearly demonstrates that the framers of the remission policy did not intend to show leniency towards convicts under MCOCA,” the State SLP added.
Also, the HC failed to take into account the pending cases against Gawli and the possibility of his involvement in similar activities again. Gawli is also facing another prosecution under MCOCA and the trial of the said case is at a fag end, it added.
“Thus the Hon’ble Bombay High Court failed to consider the potential impact on the society at large before granting the benefits of remission to the Respondent,” the State contended.
