1/3 48-Cri.WP-581-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.581 OF 2026 SANTOSH SUDAM JADHAV VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL PRISON - -- - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms Khushi K. Kadu, Advocate for petitioner. Smt N. R. Tripathi, Addl. Public Prosecutor for respondents. CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE & URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ. DATED : September 16, 2026 P. C. 1. The petitioner-convict, undergoing imprisonment in Amravati Central Prison on being convicted under Section 6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) and directed to undergo unconditional sentence to undergo imprisonment for rest of his life is aggrieved by rejection of his application for parole. Two concurrent orders passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons and Additional Director General of Police and Inspector General, Prisons and Correctional Services, Maharashtra State, Pune have rejected his application. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Additional Public Prosecutor Smt Tripathi. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was charged with an offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. By the judgment delivered by the District and Sessions Judge, Yavatmal 2026:BHC-NAG:12478-DB 2/3 48-Cri.WP-581-26.odt dated 09/12/2022, he has been convicted for life imprisonment to be undergone till remainder of his life i.e. the end of his life. Upon having undergone five years and eleven months imprisonment, he preferred an application on 11/12/2025 for grant of parole leave on the ground of treatment of his father by annexing necessary documents. However, this application has been rejected and contention of the petitioner is that he is entitled for being released on regular parole to attend serious illness of his blood relatives or spouse. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, however would invite our attention to the Maharashtra Prisons (Furlough and Parole) Rules, 2024 which has highlighted the types of parole as Regular Parole and Emergency Parole. But, according to Smt Tripathi, the eligibility for parole prescribed by the Rules is as follows : “ 14. Eligibility for parole: (1) All prisoners except foreign prisoners, prisoners sentenced to death and prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for life till death, shall be eligible for regular parole, on completion of one year of actual imprisonment. (2) All prisoners except foreign prisoners are eligible for emergency parole.” 3. On perusal of the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed, according to us, the petitioner is not eligible for being released on parole as his sentence is imprisonment for life till death being convicted for serious offence under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. 3/3 48-Cri.WP-581-26.odt 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the decision of this Court dated 24/04/2026 in case of Pradeep S/o Rambhau Gaikwad vs State of Maharashtra and anr. (Criminal Writ Petition No.166/2026 to which one of us Justice (Urmila Joshi-Phalke is a party). We perused the said judgment and it can be seen that the petitioner before the Court was convicted for 14 years Rigorous Imprisonment in Special POCSO case, but subsequently his sentence was reduced to 10 years. Though this penalty imposed itself makes a difference, according to us, the view adopted by this Court in the said decision in case of Pradeep R. Gaikwad (supra) is not applicable in the present case. Another decision upon which the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance is in case of Rahul Ashok Shardul vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. (Criminal Writ Petition No.480/2020) decided on 30/03/2021. But this decision is prior to the amendment to the Maharashtra Prisons (Furlough And Parole) Rules, 2024 wherein a specific embargo is created in not releasing the prisoners sentenced to death and prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for life till death on parole. 5. In the wake of aforesaid, as we find no illegality in the impugned order that is assailed before us, we dismiss the writ petition. ( Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.) (Bharati Dangre, J.) Asmita Signed by: Smt. Asmita A. Bhandakkar Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 21/09/2026 18:41:02