Team Goemkarponn
PANAJI: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has declined a request by the father of murder victim Mandar Surlakar to formally intervene in proceedings related to convict Rohan Pai Dhungat’s plea for premature release. However, the court has permitted him to assist the State during the hearing and submit written arguments for consideration.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Neela Gokhale and Justice Amit Jamsandekar observed that a separate intervention was unnecessary as the State was already representing the interests involved in the matter. The judges indicated that while the victim’s family could place its concerns before the court, adding another party to the proceedings would unnecessarily prolong the case.
During the hearing, counsel representing Dhungat argued that the issue of his premature release had previously been considered by the Supreme Court, which had observed that his case would be eligible for consideration upon completion of the prescribed period of imprisonment.
The defence submitted that Dhungat has completed 14 years of incarceration, including the period spent on parole, making him eligible for review under the relevant prison rules. It was further argued that the State Sentence Review (SSR) process had recommended consideration of his case and several reports had been obtained as part of the exercise.
According to the submissions, the proposal was later opposed by the Presiding Officer of the Children’s Court that had convicted Dhungat, following which the State government rejected the request for premature release.
The defence also informed the court that a previous order of the State government rejecting the application had already been set aside by the High Court, which directed authorities to undertake a fresh evaluation of the case.
Recording its decision on the intervention plea, the Bench stated that the victim’s father would not be added as a formal party to the proceedings. However, he would be allowed to assist the Additional Public Prosecutor during arguments and could file written submissions if he wished to place his views on record.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on July 2.
In a significant ruling delivered in December last year, the High Court had quashed the State government’s order rejecting Dhungat’s application for premature release. The court had observed that the authorities had not adequately considered the recommendation of the State Sentence Review Board and held that the opinion of the convicting court alone could not form the sole basis for rejecting the request.
The State government was subsequently directed to reconsider the application in accordance with the provisions of the Goa Prisons Rules, 2006.
