<p>Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has ordered the release of a man, who was in jail even after completing his sentence due to his inability to pay the fine, noting that to make him undergo the entire default sentence would amount to “travesty of justice”.</p><p>A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande in a judgment of June 27, a copy of which was made available on Friday, said the man has to be released forthwith to “prevent the abuse of process of law”.</p><p>The court ordered the immediate release of the man, who continued to be in jail even after serving the sentence handed to him. He was undergoing the default sentence for not being able to pay the fine the trial court had imposed on him.</p>.<p>Along with justice, magnanimity is one of the twin peaks of moral virtue, said the HC.</p><p>“Justice is not an artificial virtue but it necessarily embraces magnanimity,” the court said.</p>.<p>It added that the law recognises the principle that “mercy is reasonable in the time of affliction as clouds of rain in the time of drought”.</p><p>The court was hearing a petition filed by one Sikandar Kale who was convicted in 2019 in 14 criminal cases in Kolhapur on charges of house trespassing, mischief and theft.</p>.Pay cost or face contempt notice: SC raps lawyer for not depositing fine imposed on him.<p>He had been in custody since his arrest in 2017.</p><p>Kale was sentenced to two years in all the cases and his sentence was to run concurrently. The magistrate collectively fined him Rs 2,65,000 and imposed a default sentence if he failed to deposit the amount.</p><p>Kale in his plea said he had served his conviction sentence but since he was not able to afford the fine due to poverty, he was facing the prospect of being incarcerated for a further period of nine years.</p>.<p>The man sought a reduction of the default sentence.</p><p>The bench noted that the petitioner belongs to the financially weaker class of society and continued to remain in jail even after the completion of his sentence as he had not been able to arrange the fine amount.</p><p>“If he is directed to undergo the entire default sentence, he will be required to be incarcerated for a further period of nine years, which in our consideration would amount to travesty of justice,” HC said.</p><p>The bench reduced the fine amount imposed on the petitioner in some of the cases and said the sentence he had undergone already shall be considered as the default sentence for not paying the fine.</p>.<p>The bench noted that Kale deserved his release back in 2020 itself, after serving the sentence imposed on him but continued to be incarcerated till 2024 due to his inability to pay the fine.</p><p>The court noted that the fine was “not a small amount but a whopping sum of Rs 2,65,000”. </p>
<p>Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has ordered the release of a man, who was in jail even after completing his sentence due to his inability to pay the fine, noting that to make him undergo the entire default sentence would amount to “travesty of justice”.</p><p>A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande in a judgment of June 27, a copy of which was made available on Friday, said the man has to be released forthwith to “prevent the abuse of process of law”.</p><p>The court ordered the immediate release of the man, who continued to be in jail even after serving the sentence handed to him. He was undergoing the default sentence for not being able to pay the fine the trial court had imposed on him.</p>.<p>Along with justice, magnanimity is one of the twin peaks of moral virtue, said the HC.</p><p>“Justice is not an artificial virtue but it necessarily embraces magnanimity,” the court said.</p>.<p>It added that the law recognises the principle that “mercy is reasonable in the time of affliction as clouds of rain in the time of drought”.</p><p>The court was hearing a petition filed by one Sikandar Kale who was convicted in 2019 in 14 criminal cases in Kolhapur on charges of house trespassing, mischief and theft.</p>.Pay cost or face contempt notice: SC raps lawyer for not depositing fine imposed on him.<p>He had been in custody since his arrest in 2017.</p><p>Kale was sentenced to two years in all the cases and his sentence was to run concurrently. The magistrate collectively fined him Rs 2,65,000 and imposed a default sentence if he failed to deposit the amount.</p><p>Kale in his plea said he had served his conviction sentence but since he was not able to afford the fine due to poverty, he was facing the prospect of being incarcerated for a further period of nine years.</p>.<p>The man sought a reduction of the default sentence.</p><p>The bench noted that the petitioner belongs to the financially weaker class of society and continued to remain in jail even after the completion of his sentence as he had not been able to arrange the fine amount.</p><p>“If he is directed to undergo the entire default sentence, he will be required to be incarcerated for a further period of nine years, which in our consideration would amount to travesty of justice,” HC said.</p><p>The bench reduced the fine amount imposed on the petitioner in some of the cases and said the sentence he had undergone already shall be considered as the default sentence for not paying the fine.</p>.<p>The bench noted that Kale deserved his release back in 2020 itself, after serving the sentence imposed on him but continued to be incarcerated till 2024 due to his inability to pay the fine.</p><p>The court noted that the fine was “not a small amount but a whopping sum of Rs 2,65,000”. </p>