Karnataka High Court
Mallikarjun Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 March, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2275
WP No. 200480 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 200480 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
MALLIKARJUN REDDY
S/O SOMANATH REDDY TIPPANNAVAR,
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. HANGARAKI VILLAGE, TQ. SEDAM,
DIST. KALABURAGI,
NOW IN KALABURAGI (CENTRAL PRISON).
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M. SUDHAKAR RAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by SACHIN 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Location: HIGH THROUGH HOME SECRETARY,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA GOVT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHAN SOUDHA,
BANGLORE-560001.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT
CENTRAL PRINSON KALABURAGI.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
KALABURAGI DISTRICT, KALABURAGI.
4. THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR,
SEDAM POLICE STATION, SEDAM
DIST. KALABURAGI.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2275
WP No. 200480 of 2025
HC-KAR
REPRESENTED BY
STATE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585107.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VIRANAGOUDA M. BIRADAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, a)
ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 27.01.2025 IN FILE NO. CJK/JE-I/ / 2024-25
PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 AS PER ANNEXURE-J AND ALSO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON
PAROLE AS PER LAW. b) ISSUE ANY WRIT OR ORDER OR
DIRECTIONS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash the impugned endorsement dated 27.01.2025 bearing No.KeKaaKa/NyaVi-1/ /2024-25 passed by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-K. -3- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2275 WP No. 200480 of 2025 HC-KAR
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.
3. The petitioner had filed an application before the respondent No.2 with a prayer to release him on parole for a period of 30 days. The said application was initially rejected by the respondent No.2 on 08.06.2021. The same was questioned by the petitioner before this Court in W.P.No.203409/2024, which was disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation along with supportive documents and the respondent No.2 was directed to consider the same within a period of three weeks from the date of submission of such representation. Subsequently, the petitioner had filed another application and the respondent No.2 had called for a report from the respondent No.4, who had submitted a report on 23.01.2025 vide Annexure-J. Based on the said report, the impugned endorsement has been issued by the respondent No.2 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to release him on parole for a period of 30 days. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court. -4-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2275 WP No. 200480 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that, the petitioner was charge-sheeted in the present case for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 304(B) and 302 of IPC and Sections 3, 4, and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, and was tried for the charge-sheeted offences by the jurisdictional Sessions Court in S.C.No.236/2002. It appears that, the trial Court had acquitted the petitioner in S.C.No.236/2002 vide Judgment and order of acquittal dated 24.02.2010, however, in Criminal Appeal No.3692/2010 filed by the State, the Division Bench of this Court had set aside the Judgment and order of acquittal passed in S.C.No.236/2002, by Judgment and order dated 08.08.2017 and had convicted him for the charge-sheeted offence. The said Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in Criminal Appeal No.3692/2010 has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
5. The custody certificate of the petitioner at Annexure-F dated 18.10.2024 would go to show that, after the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 02.05.2002, he was in custody till 19.06.2003. Thereafter, -5- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2275 WP No. 200480 of 2025 HC-KAR he was on bail during the pendency of the trial. Subsequently, he was acquitted by the trial Court in S.C.No.236/2002 and thereafter, the said Judgment and order of acquittal was set aside by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.3692/2010 on 08.08.2017. The petitioner was again taken to custody on 22.09.2017 and ever since then, he is in custody. From the aforesaid, it is apparent that, for a period of about 14 years i.e. from 19.06.2003 to 22.09.2017, the petitioner was on bail. There was no complaint as against him at any point of time during the aforesaid 14 years that he had involved himself in any other crime or that he had caused any untoward incident in the village.
6. Under the circumstances, the report of respondent No.4 at Annexure-J dated 23.01.2025 expressing apprehension that, in the event the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to involve himself in any untoward incident in the village, is without any basis. The respondent No.2 has failed to appreciate the aforesaid aspects of the matter and mechanically has placed reliance on such a report and has -6- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2275 WP No. 200480 of 2025 HC-KAR rejected the prayer of the petitioner to release him on parole for a period of 30 days.
7. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that, the impugned endorsement at Annexure-K dated 27.01.2025 bearing No.KeKaaKa/NyaVi-1/ /2024-25 issued by respondent No.2 cannot be sustained.
8. Accordingly, the following order:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed;
(ii) The impugned endorsement at
Annexure-K dated 27.01.2025 bearing
No.KeKaaKa/NyaVi-1/ /2024-25 issued by
respondent No.2 is quashed and he is directed to consider the request of the petitioner for release on parole afresh in the light of the observation made herein above, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60