ROHAN DHUNGAT ETC. versus THE STATE OF GOA & ORS. ETC.

ROHAN DHUNGAT ETC. versus THE STATE OF GOA & ORS. ETC.

Because Rule 335 of the Goa Prisons Rules, 2006 expressly provides that period of release on Furlough and Parole shall be counted as remission of sentence, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's conclusion that the period of parole must be excluded from the period of sentence when computing whether a convict has completed 14 years of actual imprisonment for the purpose of premature release.

Parties
Petitioner: ROHAN DHUNGAT & ORS.; Respondent: THE STATE OF GOA & ORS.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (crl.) / Final Hearing in Supreme Court (slps Dismissed)
Outcome
Special Leave Petitions dismissed.
Legal Topics
Parole, Remission of Sentence, Premature Release, Computation of Sentence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ROHAN DHUNGAT & ORS.

Petitioner

THE STATE OF GOA & ORS.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (crl.) / Final Hearing in Supreme Court (slps Dismissed)

  1. 1 Whether the period of parole is to be excluded from the period of sentence under the Goa Prisons Rules, 2006 while considering 14 years of actual imprisonment for the purpose of premature release?

Ratio Decidendi

Because Rule 335 of the Goa Prisons Rules, 2006 expressly provides that period of release on Furlough and Parole shall be counted as remission of sentence, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's conclusion that the period of parole must be excluded from the period of sentence when computing whether a convict has completed 14 years of actual imprisonment for the purpose of premature release.

Court Disposition

Special Leave Petitions dismissed.

Orders

  • Special Leave Petitions dismissed.