Synopsis

This judgment by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) allows a criminal writ petition filed by a life convict seeking the benefit of set-off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The petitioner had been convicted for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, but the trial court had not granted him set-off for the period he spent in custody as an undertrial prisoner, despite granting it to a co-accused. The High Court held that the benefit of set-off under Section 428 is a statutory mandate, not a discretionary relief, and that the omission by the trial court cannot deprive the convict of this right. The court rejected the State's objection on maintainability and directed the prison authorities to grant set-off for the period from the date of arrest to the date of conviction.

1. Heading for the judgment

Citation: Vikas @ Sadhu Gendev Hagare (Mali) v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors., Criminal Writ Petition No. 88 of 2026, decided on 13.03.2026 (Bombay High Court - Aurangabad Bench)
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandipkumar C. More and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde (Division Bench)
Core Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 428); Constitution of India (Article 226).

Bombay High Court holds that set-off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. is a statutory right of a convict; omission by trial court cannot deny the benefit, and writ court can direct prison authorities to grant it.

2. Legal framework

This judgment deals with the mandatory nature of set-off under the Code of Criminal Procedure and the role of the executive in its implementation.

• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.):
  Section 428: This provision mandates that the period of detention undergone by an accused as an undertrial prisoner sha

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.