Aslam Salim Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr

JUDGMENT

(Per Revati Mohite Dere,J.)

:

¶1Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶2Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith, with the consent of the parties and is taken up for final disposal. Learned A.P.P waives notice on behalf of the respondents –State.

¶3This is a glaring case warranting interference of this Court, as a protector of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty, lest there would be serious miscarriage of justice. The facts in the instant case, warrants exercise of our writ jurisdiction, as well as inherent jurisdiction, to do justice, for which the Courts exists.

¶4Briefly stated the facts are as under:- The petitioner, currently aged 30 years, has filed the petition through the Legal Services Authority, invoking our writ jurisdiction as well as inherent powers, and as such, seeks a direction, that the sentences of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner, by different Courts, in 41 cases, run concurrently. The petitioner also seeks setting aside of the fine amount of Rs.1,26,400/- (total), passed by the various Courts in 41 cases. The petitioner is in custody since 3rd December 2014. The petitioner was arrested and prosecuted essentially for the offences pertaining to theft in 41 cases by different police stations. According to the petitioner, he was falsely implicated in the said cases and being ill-literate and unaware of the niceties of law and having regard to his financial condition, being unable to engage a lawyer, he pleaded guilty in all the 41 cases, under a bonafide belief that he would be released from prison for the period already undergone by him as an undertrial prisoner. The details of all the 41 cases are as under; Sr. No. Police Stn.,/ CR No./ Sessions Case No./ Before Learned Court Offences Date of Arrest Date of Conviction & Sentence Vishrantwadi Police Stn CR No.156 of 2014 R.C.C. No.337/2014, Ld. Judicial Magistrate, F.C, Khadki, Pune U/secs. 454,457,380 r/w. 34 of IPC

12.09.2014

03.12.2014 U/s.380 IPC R.I. for 18 months and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 month U/s.454 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. U/s.457 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. Vishrantwadi Police Stn CR No.229 of 2014 R.C.C. No.352/2014 Ld. Judicial Magistrate, F.C, Khadki, Pune U/secs.454,380 r/w.34 of IPC

15.09.2014

03.12.2014 U/s.380 IPC R.I. for 18 months and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 month U/s.454 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. Vishrantwadi Police Stn CR No.251 of 2014 R.C.C. No.353/2014 Ld. Judicial Magistrate, F.C, Khadki, Pune U/secs.

454, 457, 380 r/w. 34 of IPC

15.09.2014

03.12.2014 U/s.380 IPC R.I. for 18 months and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 month U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC - 1 yr. U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC - 1 yr. Vishrantwadi Police Stn CR No.212 of 2014 R.C.C. No.75/2015 Ld. Judicial Magistrate, F.C, Khadki, Pune U/secs.454,380 r/w.34 of IPC

18.03.2015

18.03.2015 U/s.380 IPC – RI 18 months and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 month U/s.454 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. 5 Vishrantwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,380 12.09.2014 18.03.2015 CR No.239 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.380 IPC R.I. for 18 months R.C.C. No.73/2015 and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 yr. U/s.454 IPC r/w.34 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. U/s.457 IPC –RI for 1 year 6 Vishrantwadi Police Stn U/secs. 454, 12.09.2014 18.03.2015 CR No.120 of 2014 457, 380 r/w. U/s.380 IPC – RI 18 months and R.C.C. No.74/2015 34 of IPC fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI 1 year Ld. Judicial Magistrate, F.C, Khadki, Pune U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC – RI for 1 year. U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC – RI for 1 year 7 Vishrantwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457, 12.09.2014 18.03.2015 CR No.29 of 2014 380 r/w.34 of U/s.380 IPC R.I. for 18 months R.C.C. No.80/2015 IPC and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 Ld. Judicial Magistrate, month. F.C, Khadki, Pune U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC RI for 1 Yr. 8 Vishrantwadi Police Stn U/secs.457,511 10.09.2014 18.03.2015 CR No.142 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. R.C.C. No.387/2014 U/s. 511 IPC - RI for 18 months Ld. Judicial Magistrate, and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI 1 F.C, Khadki, Pune month N.oS.oChitnisoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo5/22 Vishrantwadi Police Stn CR No.66 of 2014 R.C.C. No.76/2015 Ld. Judicial Magistrate, F.C, Khadki, Pune U/secs.454,380 r/w.34 of IPC

11.09.2014 18.03.2015 U/s.380 r/w.34 IPC R.I. for 18 months and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 year. U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. Vishrantwadi Police Stn CR No.36 of 2014 R.C.C. No.72/2015 Ld. Judicial Magistrate, F.C, Khadki, Pune U/secs.454,380 r/w.34 of IPC

10.09.2014 18.03.2015 U/s.380 r/w.34 IPC R.I. for 18 months and fine of Rs.500/- i/d. RI for 1 month. U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC R.I. for 1 yr. U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC – RI for 1 Yr. Sahakar Nagar Police Stn CR No.6 of 2014 R.C.C. No.4051/2014 Ld.

11th Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Pune U/secs.457,380 r/w.34 of IPC

02.08.2014 06.01.2015 U/s.380 IPC S.I. for 2 Yrs. and fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. SI for 7 days. U/s.457 IPC S.I. for 2 yrs. and fine of Rs.2000/- id. SI – 7 days. Sahakar Nagar Police Stn CR No.26 of 2014 R.C.C. No.2672/2015 Ld.

11th Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Pune U/secs.454,380 r/w.34 of IPC

06.09.2014 03.09.2015 U/s.380 IPC S.I. for 2 Yrs. and fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. SI for 7 days. U/s.454 IPC S.I. for 1 yr. and fine of Rs.2000 i/ d. SI 7 days. Sahakar Nagar Police Stn CR No.3 of 2014 R.C.C. No.674/2016 Ld.

11th Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Pune U/secs.457,380 r/w.34 of IPC

02.09.2014 08.03.2016 U/s.380 IPC 2 Yrs. Imprisonments and fine of Rs.2000/- and i/d SI 4 days U/s.457 IPC imprisonment 2 years and fine of Rs.2000/- Id. SI – 4 days. 14 Sahakar Nagar Police Stn U/secs.457,380 09.03.2014 08.03.2016 CR No.36 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.380 IPC - SI 2 Yrs. R.C.C. No.601/2016 Imprisonments and fine of thLd. 11 Judicial Rs.2000/- and i/d SI 4 days Magistrate, F.C., Pune U/s.457 IPC SI 2 years and fine of Rs.2000/- id. SI – 4 days. 15 Sahakar Nagar Police Stn U/secs.454,380 of 02.09.2014 19.04.2017 CR No.122 of 2014 IPC U/s.380 IPC SI 2 Yrs. R.C.C. No.78/2015 U/s.454 IPC SI 2 years. Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Pune. 16 Sahakar Nagar Police Stn U/secs.454,380 of 04.09.2014 19.04.2017 CR No.106 of 2014 IPC U/s.380 IPC SI 2 Yrs. R.C.C. No.77/2015 U/s.454 IPC SI 2 years. Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Pune. 17 Khadak Police Stn U/secs.457,380,511, 01.11.2014 06.05.2015 CR No.08 of 2014 34 of IPC U/s.457 IPC R.C.C. No.4488/2014 SI – 6 months & 15 days and th Ld. J.M.F.C., 6 Court, fine Rs.100/- i/d SI 4 days Pune. 380 r/w.511 IPC SI 6 months 18 KhadakoPoliceoStn U/secs.454,380,34 31.10.2014 29.06.2015 CRoNo.113oofo2014 of IPC U/s.454 IPC R.C.C.oNo.651/2015 SI – 8 months and fine th Ld. J.M.F.C., 6 Court, Rs.100/- i/d SI 2 days Pune. 380 r/w.34 IPC SI 6 months and fine Rs.100/- i/d. SI 2 days.

N.oS.oChitnisoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo7/22 19 KhadakoPoliceoStn U/secs.379 of IPC 30.10.2010 27.09.2016 CRoNo.214oofo2010 U/s.379 IPC R.C.C.oNo.4850/2010 RI – 3 Yrs. and fine Rs.5000/- th Ld. J.M.F.C., 6 Court, i/d SI 2 months Pune. 20 Khadak Police Stn U/secs.457,380 of 15.01.2008 27.09.2016 CR No.05 of 2008 IPC U/s.457 IPC R.C.C. No.1235/2008 RI – 3 yrs. and fine Rs.3000/- i/d th Ld. J.M.F.C., 6 Court, SI 2 months Pune. 380 IPC RI 3 yrs. and fine Rs.3000/- i/d.SI 2 months. 21 Khadak Police Stn U/secs.454,457, 02.07.2011 27.09.2016 CR No.150 of 2011 380 of IPC U/s.454 IPC R.C.C. No.3220/2011 RI – 2 yrs. and fine Rs.3000/- th Ld. J.M.F.C., 6 Court, i/d SI 2 months Pune. U/s.457 IPC RI – 2 yrs. and fine Rs.3000/- i/d SI 2 months 380 IPC RI 2 yrs. and fine Rs.3,000/- i/d. SI 2 months. 22 Warje Malwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,380,411 01.10.2014 22.06.2015 CR No.113 of 2015 of IPC U/s.454, 380, 411 IPC R.C.C. No.475/2015 Imprisonment – 3 yrs. and fine Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. Rs.7000/- i/d SI 5 months 23 Warje Malwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,380,411 04.10.2014 22.06.2015 CR No.40 of 2014 of IPC U/s.454, 380, 411 IPC R.C.C. No.2003/2015 Imprisonment – 3 yrs. and fine Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. Rs.7000/- i/d SI 5 months N.oS.oChitnisoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo8/22 24 Warje Malwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 03.10.2014 26.08.2016 CR No.235 of 2014 r/w.511 of IPC U/s.454, 380, 511 IPC R.C.C. No.599/2015 Imprisonment – 2 yrs. and Ld. J.M.F.C., Court No.3, fine Rs.1000/- i/d SI 10 Pune. days. 25 Bharati Vidyapeeth Police U/secs.454,457,380, 02.12.2014 31.07.2015 Stn 511 of IPC U/s.454 IPC CR No.197 of 2014 RI – 6 months and fine R.C.C. No.0400617/2015 Rs.2000/- i/d SI 3 months Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. U/s.457 IPC RI – 2 yrs. and fine Rs.2000/- i/d SI 3 months 380 r/w.511 IPC RI 6 months 26 Bharati Vidyapeeth Police U/secs.454,380 of IPC 02.12.2014 28.07.2016 Stn U/s.454, 380 IPC CR No.73 of 2014 RI – 3 yrs. and fine R.C.C. No.4218/2015 Rs.5000/- i/d RI 1 yr. Ld. J.M.F.C., Court No.4, Pune. 27 Bharati Vidyapeeth Police U/secs.454, 380, 34 of 02.12.2014 28.07.2016 Stn IPC U/s.454, 380,34 IPC CR No.227 of 2014 RI – 3 years fine Rs.5000/- R.C.C. No.807/2015 i/d RI 1 year Ld. J.M.F.C., Court No.4, Pune. N.oS.oChitnisoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo9/22 28 Hinjwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 28.10.2014 07.09.2015 CR No.295 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC R.C.C. No.4541/2014 RI – 9 months and fine Ld. J.M.F.C., Court No.7, Rs.1000/- i/d SI 10 days Pune. U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC RI – 9 months and fine Rs.1000/- i/d SI 10 days 380 r/w.34 IPC RI 9 months and fine of Rs.1000/- i/d SI – 10 days 29 Hinjwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 28.07.2014 07.09.2015 CR No.311 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC R.C.C. No.4818/2014 RI – 1 year and fine Rs.1000/- Ld. J.M.F.C., Court No.7, i/d SI 10 days Pune. U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC RI – 1 year and fine Rs.1000/- i/d SI 10 days 380 r/w.34 IPC RI 1 year and fine of Rs.1000/- i/d SI – 10 days 30 Hinjwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 28.07.2014 07.09.2015 CR No.116 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC R.C.C. No.4819/2014 RI – 1 year and fine Rs.1000/- Ld. J.M.F.C., Court No.7, i/d SI 10 days Pune. U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC RI – 1 year and fine Rs.1000/- i/d SI 10 days 380 r/w.34 IPC RI 1 year and fine of Rs.1000/- i/d SI – 10 days N.oS.oChitnisoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo10/22 31 Shivaji Nagar Police Stn U/secs.353 of IPC 19.05.2015 18.09.2015 CR No.16 of 2015 U/s.353 IPC R.C.C. RI – 8 months No.0403531/2015 Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. 32 Kondhva Police Stn U/secs.380 of IPC 16.09.2014 14.01.2016 CR No.314 of 2014 U/s.380 IPC R.C.C. No.91/2015 SI – period already undergone Ld. J.M.F.C., in detention Cantonment Court, Pune. 33 Wanwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 22.04.2015 17.02.2016 CR No.96 of 2015 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.379 SI – 2 Yrs., R.C.C. No.435/2015 Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. U/s.454 IPC SI – 2 Yrs., U/s.457 IPC SI – 3 Yrs., 34 Wanwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 03.11.2014 12.04.2016 CR No.125 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s. 380 r/w. 34 SI – 2 Yrs., R.C.C. No.859/2014 Ld. J.M.F.C., U/s.454 r/w. 34 IPC Cantonment Court, SI – 2 Yrs., Pune. U/s.457 r/w. 34 IPC SI – 3 Yrs., N.oS.oChitnisoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo11/22 35 Wanwadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 15.09.2015 31.08.2016 CR No.142 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s. 454, 457, 380 r/w. 34 of R.C.C. No.101 /2016 IPC SI – 2 Yrs., Ld. J.M.F.C., Lashkar, Pune. 36 Bibwewadi Police Stn U/secs.454,457,380 18.08.2014 28.07.2016 CR No.78 of 2014 of IPC U/s.454, 457, 380 IPC R.C.C. No.4568/2014 RI – 2 Yrs. and fine Rs.5000/- Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. i/d RI 6 months 37 MIDC Bhosari Police Stn U/secs.454,380 07.11.2014 29.08.2016 CR No.112 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.454,380 r/w.34 IPC R.C.C. No.57/2015 SI – 1 year, 9 months and 22 Ld. J.M.F.C., Pimpri, days Pune. 38 Vimantal Police Stn U/secs.454,380,411 13.11.2014 09.09.2016 CR No.112 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.380 r/w.34 IPC R.C.C. RI – 3 yrs. and fine Rs.5000/- i/ No.0400268/2015 d SI 6 months Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC RI – 3 years and fine Rs.5000/- i/d SI 6 months

39 Vimantal Police Stn U/secs.454,380,411 13.11.2014 09.09.2016 CR No.191 of 2014 r/w.34 of IPC U/s.380 r/w.34 IPC R.C.C. RI – 3 yrs. and fine Rs.5000/- i/ No.0400269/2019 d SI 6 months Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. U/s.454 r/w.34 IPC RI – 3 years and fine Rs.5000/- i/d SI 6 months N.oS.oChitnisoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooo12/22 Vimantal Police Stn CR No.115 of 2014 R.C.C. No.0400270/2015 Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. U/secs.454,

457, 380, r/w.34 of IPC

13.11.2014

09.09.2016 U/s.380 r/w.34 IPC RI – 3 yrs. and fine Rs.5000/- i/ d SI 6 months U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC RI – 3 years and fine Rs.5000/- i/d SI 6 months Vimantal Police Stn CR No.139 of 2014 R.C.C. No.0400272/2015 Ld. J.M.F.C., Pune. U/secs. 454, 457, 380, r/w.34 of IPC

13.11.2014

09.09.2016 U/s.380 r/w.34 IPC RI – 3 yrs. and fine Rs.5000/- i/ d SI 6 months U/s.457 r/w.34 IPC RI – 3 years and fine Rs.5000/- i/d SI 6 months.

¶3It appears, that on arrest in one case, the petitioner came to be arrested in the other cases, on transfer warrant. As noted above, the petitioner has pleaded guilty in all the 41 cases and has been sentenced to imprisonment and payment of fine, as stated aforesaid. Although, some of the cases were pending before the same Court, there is no direction that the sentences to either run concurrently/consecutively.

¶4Section 427(1) Cr.PC provides that when a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment or imprisonment for life, such imprisonment or imprisonment for life shall commence at the expiration of the imprisonment to which he has been previously sentenced, unless the Court directs that the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with such previous sentence. In other words, Section sub-section (1) of Section 427 confers a discretion on the Court to direct that the subsequent sentence following a conviction shall run concurrently with the previous one. The Apex Court in the case of Mohd Zahid v/s State through NCB1, whilst interpreting the said provision and after considering the precedents, has held in para 17 as under :- "17. Thus from the aforesaid decisions of this Court, the principles of law that emerge are as under:

17.1. If a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment, such subsequent term of imprisonment would normally commence at the expiration of the imprisonment to which he was previously sentenced.

(2022) 12 SCC 426

17.2. Ordinarily the subsequent sentence would commence at the expiration of the first term of imprisonment unless the court directs the subsequent sentence to run concurrently with the previous sentence.

17.3. The general rule is that where there are different transactions, different crime numbers and cases have been decided by the different judgments, concurrent sentence cannot be awarded under Section 427 CrPC.

17.4 Under Section 427(1) CrPC the court has the power and discretion to issue a direction that all the subsequent sentences run concurrently with the previous sentence, however discretion has to be exercised judiciously depending upon the nature of the offence or the offences committed and the facts in situation. However, there must be a specific direction or order by the court that the subsequent sentence to run concurrently with the previous sentence."

¶5Thus, it is evident that the Court has the power and discretion under Section 427(1) of Cr.PC, to issue a direction that all the subsequent sentences run concurrently with the previous sentence. However, the said discretion has to be exercised judiciously depending upon the nature of the offence or the offences committed and the facts of the case. Admittedly, in none of the cases as reflected in the chart aforesaid, though some of the cases were tried by the same Court and arose from the same police station, there is no specific direction or order by the said Court, that the subsequent sentences to run concurrently with the previous sentence. There is no specific direction issued by the trial Court, before whom there were more than one case pending, in terms of Section 427(1) Cr.PC allowing the subsequent sentences to run concurrently.

¶6We find that the Courts before whom there was more than one case pending before them, had failed to exercise their discretion. It appears that the petitioner was not defended by any advocate nor does it appear that he was offered any legal aid by the trial Court. It appears that the petitioner was only 21 years and his family members were dependent on him. It appears that the petitioner pleaded guilty with a belief that he would be released on undergone sentence. It is the petitioner's case, that he had prayed for leniency on the premise that he belonged to a poor family and that his family was dependent on him, however, whilst handing over the sentence and whilst imposing fine, the prayer of the petitioner was not taken into consideration. None of the Courts have considered these factors. Infact, 3 cases, out of the 41 cases, are of 2008, 2010 and 2011. If according to the prosecution, he was about 21 years of age in 2014, he most certainly, was a juvenile in conflict with law, in 2008, 2010 and may be even in 2011. None of the Courts even dwelled into the dates, presumably because, the petitioner pleaded guilty in the said 3 cases, in 2016.

¶7The sentencing policy of criminal jurisprudence mandates Courts to pass such sentences as would meet its primary twin objects of deterrence and re-formation. The deterrent effect of a sentence is to prevent the commission of a similar offence by the convict by confining him to jail and to prevent the prospective offenders from committing such a crime. Infact, compensation some times can be said to have such a deterrent effect. However, the same would depend upon the facts of each case. The sentence of imprisonment should also have a reformative aim, inasmuch as, it should not demoralize the offender and infact, the offender should be given an opportunity depending on the nature of offence to improve himself. Thus, any sentence imposed by any Courts must maintain a proper balance between the deterrent and reformative objects of a sentencing policy and must ensure that the said object is sufficiently met.

¶8As noted from the chart reproduced hereinabove, if the petitioner is permitted to undergo imprisonment in all the aforesaid cases, he would be compelled to undergo imprisonment of approximately 83 years 3 months and 5 days, and since he is not in a position to pay the fine, for non-payment of the fine amount, he would require to undergo imprisonment of further 10 years 1 month and 26 days i.e. a total of 93 years 5 months, his entire life, with no hope whatsoever, to even come out of jail. A sentence, more than what a life convict would have to undergo for murder. If permitted, this would certainly lead to travesty of justice. Being alive to this reality, we cannot permit this miscarriage of justice.

¶9In this context and having regard to the peculiar facts, it is apposite to quote the words of Earl Warren 'It is the spirit and not the form of law, that keeps justice alive.' The petitioner was about 21 years old at the relevant time when he was booked in the aforesaid 38 offences and in 3 cases, a juvenile in conflict with law. All, except 3 offences pertain to the period 2014 to 2015. As noted above, it appears that the petitioner could not afford to engage a lawyer having regard to his financial condition and hence pleaded guilty in all the 41 cases. Infact, even the present petition is filed through jail. Since, the cases were tried by different Courts, we are unable to invoke Section 427(1) Cr.PC. However, at the same time, we cannot be oblivious, to the fact, that there will be serious miscarriage of justice, if we fail to interfere and exercise our discretion, in writ jurisdiction as well as under our inherent powers, in the peculiar facts of this case. Courts exist to do justice, and this is one such case, that begs our interference.

¶10As rightly said by William Scott Downey, 'Law without justice is a wound without a cure' . Hence, in exercise of our writ and inherent jurisdiction, we deem it appropriate to put right the clock, to prevent miscarriage of justice, failing which the petitioner would remain incarcerated for more than 90 years, in 41 cases (total), for committing 'theft', with no prospect of coming out of jail anytime in the future. The actual period of imprisonment undergone by the petitioner is more than 9 years and without remission more than 11 years. The petitioner was 21 years old and is now about 30 years of age.

¶11We have perused a few of the FIRs to satisfy our conscience, with respect to the nature of offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner. It appears that the said FIRs have been lodged against unknown person/persons. The material in some of the cases, if trial had commenced may have probably ended into petitioner's acquittal, for want of evidence. It was the bounden duty of the learned Magistrates to have atleast perused the papers before awarding the sentences, more particularly, when the petitioner had pleaded guilty, so as to ensure that the sentences awarded were commensurate with the evidence on record against the petitioner. The learned Judge has also failed to consider, that the petitioner/accused was a juvenile in conflict with law, in cases of 2008, 2010 and may be even in 2011, as it is the prosecution's case, that the petitioner was 21 years of age in 2014.

¶12It is well settled that when there is grave error of law apparent on the face of record or there is a miscarriage of justice, resulting from the orders passed by the Courts below or when it is necessary for enforcing fundamental or legal rights or to meet the ends of justice, the Court can certainly entertain a petition of this nature.

¶13Section 482 Cr.PC can be invoked to render complete justice. It can be exercised to give effect to an order under Cr.PC;f to prevent abuse of the process of the Court; and, to secure the ends of justice. In short, Section 482 Cr.PC is a reminder to High Courts, that they are not merely Courts of law, but also Courts of justice and as such possess inherent powers to remove injustice. The petitioner, in the facts, has no other effective alternative remedy to redress his grievance/injustice, that will be caused to him. Inherent jurisdiction is to be exercised ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice for which alone, Courts exist.

¶14Hence, in the peculiar facts, we exercise our writ jurisdiction, as well as, inherent powers and allow the petition, lest, there is travesty of justice. Hence, we pass the following order: ORDER

i)

The petitioner be released forthwith, on undergone sentence, in all the 41 cases reproduced hereinabove, unless required in any other case.

¶15Petition is allowed and disposed of in above terms. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this judgment.

GAURI GODSE, J.

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3157 OF 2022 Aslam Salim Shaikh Age:-30 years; Occupation: - Nil Currently Residing at: Convict Prisoner No.B – 37620 Circle No.3, Barrack No.3 Yerwada Central Prison, Pune – 06 Permanent Resident of; - Kashewadi, Bhawani Peth, Pune – 42. ...Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra (Copy to be served on Public Prosecution, High Court of Judicature of Bombay 2. The Superintendent of Jail, Yerwada Central Prison, Pune – 06. ...Respondents Ms. Gazala R. Shaikh, for the Petitioner. Ms. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondents – State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE & GAURI GODSE, JJ. RESERVED ON : 16th JUNE 2023 PRONOUNCED ON: 17th JULY 2023 NISHA SANDEEP CHITNIS Date: 2023.07.19 10:58:24 +0530