MUNYA @ MUNIR GAUS SHAIKH vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Case Type: Writ Petition

Date of Judgment: 04-03-2026

Preview image for MUNYA @ MUNIR GAUS SHAIKH vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Full Judgment Text

2026:BHC-AS:11969-DB
ssm 68-wp5900.2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5900 OF 2025
Munya @ Munir Gaus Shaikh,
Age 33 years, Occu.- Labour,
R/at 611, Kasewadi, Bhavani Peth,
Pune, Maharashtra
(At present is in Yerwada Central Prison) …..Petitioner
Vs.
1) The State Of Maharashtra
(Through Superintendent of Jail,
Yerwada Jail, Pune)
2) The Secretary,
Home Department (Prison),
Govt. of Maharashtra, Mumbai.
3) Superintendent of Yerwada Jail,
Pune, Maharashtra …..Respondents
____________________________________
Mr. Shailesh Kharat a/w Adv. Vishwajeet Nimbalkar and Adv. Onkar
Chaudhari for the Petitioner.
Mr. Vinod Chate APP, for the Respondent-State.
____________________________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
th
DATE : 4 MARCH, 2026.
JUDGMENT (Per A.S. Gadkari, J.):-
1)Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties,

1/4
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 11/03/2026 19:38:09 :::

ssm 68-wp5900.2025.doc

the Petition is taken up for final hearing.
2)Petitioner, (Original A-8) was convicted under Sections 147,

148, 302 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and is
sentenced to suffer life imprisonment by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Pune, by Judgment and Order dated 20thApril, 2012 in Sessions

Case No.231 of 2009.
3)The Criminal Appeals preferred by the Petitioner and other
accused were dismissed by a common Judgment dated 6th, 7th& 8thApril,

2015 by our predecessors.
4)According to the submission of the learned Advocate for the

Petitioner, the Hon’ble the Supreme Court has not interfered with the said
Judgment dated 6th, 7th& 8thApril, 2015 passed in the Petitioner’s Appeal.
5)In the aforesaid factual background, the Petitioner has
challenged the Order dated 13thJune, 2025, whereby he has been placed in
category 4(d) of the Guidelines dated 15thMarch, 2010 issued by the Home

Department, Government of Maharashtra, under Section 432 of the Cr.P.C.
6)Heard Mr. Kharat, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr.

Chate, learned APP for the State. The entire record has been perused.
7)Mr. Kharat, submitted that, the genesis of the crime lies in a

feud between two families and that incident arose out of an assault by the
Petitioner and other co-accused on deceased Akram. According to him,
2/4
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 11/03/2026 19:38:09 :::

ssm 68-wp5900.2025.doc

since the offence was committed in the backdrop of a family feud, Category
No.3 (b) of the Guidelines dated 15thMarch, 2010 would be applicable to

the Petitioner and not Category 4(d). He submits that under category 4(d),
the Petitioner would be required to undergo imprisonment of 24 years
including remissions, whereas under Category 3(b), the Petitioner will have
to undergo 22 years of imprisonment including remissions.
8)Category 3(b) and 4(d) of 15thMarch, 2010, guidelines read as

under:-
Category<br>No.Sub-<br>Categ<br>oryCategorisation of CrimePeriod of imprisonment to<br>be undergone including<br>remissions subject to a<br>minimum of 14 years of<br>Actual Imprisonment<br>including Set-Off period.
3.Murder arising out of Land dispute,
family feuds, family prestige and
superstition.
a.….
b.Crime committed as above with<br>premeditation, either individually or<br>by a gang.22 years
4.Murder for other reasons
a.<br>b.<br>c.…….<br>…….<br>……
d.Murders committed by more than<br>one person or group of persons24 years
3.
9)A perusal of the judgments of the Trial Court as well as the

3/4
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 11/03/2026 19:38:09 :::

ssm 68-wp5900.2025.doc

Appeal Court clearly indicates that due to prior enmity arising from earlier
incidents between the family members of the deceased Akram and the
Petitioner along with the co-accused, the Petitioner and the co-accused
assaulted the deceased Akram with a blunt object on 16thDecember, 2008

at about 10.15 p.m. and also caused injuries to another victim PW-1. The
judgments further indicate that the murder of Akram was committed by the
Petitioner along with the co-accused for reasons other than those arising
out of a family feud or family prestige.
10)In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the

competent Authority of the Home Department, Government of Maharashtra
has not committed any error in placing the Petitioner under Category 4(d)
of the Guidelines 15thMarch, 2010 by the impugned Order dated 13thJune,

2025. No error either in law or on facts has been committed by the
competent Authority while passing the impugned Order.
11)We find that, there are no merits in the Petition and is

accordingly dismissed.
11.1)Rule is discharged.

(KAMAL KHATA, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)
Digitally signed
by SANJIV
SHARNAPPA
MASHALKAR
Date: 2026.03.11
19:09:40 +0530
SANJIV
SHARNAPPA
MASHALKAR
4/4
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 11/03/2026 19:38:09 :::