V.K. Tahilramani, J.

Heard both sides.

2. The case of the petitioner is that on 17.12.2012, when he was released on parole from 18.12.2012 for 30 days, he did not report back in time. As the petitioner did not surrender in time, case came to be registered against him on 16.11.2013 under Section 224 of IPC vide C.R. No. 248/13 of Byculla Police Station, Mumbai. On account of overstay, he was permanently removed from the remission register. It may be stated that as the petitioner did not report back in time, ultimately he was arrested by police and brought back to prison on 26.11.2013. Thus, there was overstay of parole by 259 days. The prayer of the petitioner is that the second punishment i.e. of permanently removing him from the remission register be quashed as it amounts to double jeopardy.

3. Thus, the petitioner has no grievance in respect of C.R. No. 248/13 which is pending trial but his only prayer is that the order of removing him from remission register be set aside. The case of the petitioner is that as he has overstayed his parole leave on account of which C.R. No. 248/13 was registered against him, in such case, he cannot be punished against for the overstay by re