Remission is reduction of jail period granted to prisoners on grounds of good conduct, nature of offence or special schemes, among others.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.Story continues below this ad“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.”Story continues below this adTherefore, 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.Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions. Expertise & Authority Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage. Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in: Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include: Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes). Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty). Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict. Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability. Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges. Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More © The Indian Express Pvt Ltd