Court directs State of Maharashtra to place convict under less severe category of premature release guidelines, recognizing family feud as mitigating factor over exceptional violence
In a significant judgment dated September 9, 2026, the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) has ordered the State of Maharashtra to reclassify the premature release category of Devidas, a convict serving life imprisonment for murder linked to a long-standing family feud. The Court held that the petitioner's crime, arising out of a family dispute, should be categorized under Category 3(b) of the Government Resolution dated March 15, 2010, which prescribes 22 years of imprisonment (including remission) before consideration for premature release, rather than the harsher Category 2(c) that mandates 26 years.
Devidas was originally convicted in 2012 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, under Sections 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), and 452 (house trespass) read with Section 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. His conviction was upheld by this Court in 2015. The petitioner had already served over 22 years in prison including remissions. However, the State had placed him under Category 2(c), intended for crimes involving "exceptional violence" against women and minors, thereby requiring a longer period before premature release.
The petitioner's counsel argued that the crime was rooted in a family feud and did not involve the degree of brutality contemplated under Category 2(c). The Court carefully analyzed the facts, including the relationship between the accused, the complainant (his wife), and the deceased (his mother-in-law), and found that the offenses were indeed the result of a protracted family dispute involving bitterness and animosity among relatives.
In its detailed reasoning, the Court referred to authoritative dictionary definitions of "family feud," emphasizing that such disputes can extend to several generations and include relatives by blood, affinity, or law. The Court noted that the petitioner's case clearly fell within the ambit of murders arising out of family feuds as contemplated under Category 3(b).
The Court also examined the opinion of the convicting court under Section 432(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which is binding on remission authorities but must be reasoned and take into account the nature of the offense and applicable guidelines. The opinion in this case was found lacking in these respects.
Importantly, the Court relied on Supreme Court precedents, including the landmark judgment in State of Haryana v. Jagdish (2010 AIR SC 1690), which mandates applying the most liberal policy available at the time of consideration for premature release. Further, the Court referred to a recent Bombay High Court ruling in Uday S/o Dhaku Sutar v. State of Maharashtra (2022), which held that when a convict's case falls under multiple categories within the same guidelines, the more favorable category must be applied.
Applying these principles, the Court quashed the State's order placing Devidas under Category 2(c) and directed that he be placed under Category 3(b) with a 22-year imprisonment requirement, thus reducing the mandatory period for premature release consideration by four years.
The State has been directed to comply with the order and issue necessary release-related directions within 15 days. This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that remission policies are applied fairly and in consonance with the nature and circumstances of the crime, especially in cases involving complex family dynamics.
Bottom Line:
Premature release guidelines under Government Resolution dated 15.03.2010 - Case categorized under 3(b) rather than 2(c) - Murders arising out of family feud considered less brutal than those committed with exceptional violence.
Statutory provision(s):
Indian Penal Code Sections 302, 307, 452, 34; Criminal Procedure Code Section 432(2)
Devidas v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(DB)(Aurangabad Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2976948
