Prabhat Yadav @ Gudda vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 March, 2026

Author: Ramesh Sinha

Bench: Ramesh Sinha

                                                            1




                                                                         2026:CGHC:11860-DB
         Digitally
         signed by
         ANURADHA
                                                                                     NAFR
ANURADHA TIWARI
TIWARI
                                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
         Date:
         2026.03.13
         10:25:29
         +0530


                                               WPCR No. 126 of 2026
                      Prabhat Yadav @ Gudda S/o Shri Kishan Yadav, Aged About 44 Years
                      R/o Milan Chowk, Kududand, Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District
                      Bilaspur C.G.
                                                                                   ... Petitioner
                                                        versus
                      1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home (Jail)
                      Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)
                      2 - The Director General of Prisons And Correctional Services
                      Chhattisgarh, Head Quarter- Prisons And Correctional Services,
                      Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.)
                      3 - The District Magistrate, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
                      4 - The Jail Superintendent, Central Jail Bilaspur C.G.
                                                                                ... Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Praveen Das, Additional Advocate General

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 12.03.2026

1. Heard Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner as

well as Mr. Praveen Das, learned Additional Advocate General,

appearing for the State/respondents.

2. The matter relates to consideration of the petitioner's application

for grant of leave under the C.G. Prisoners Leave Rules, 1989,

which was alleged to be pending before the competent authority

despite the recommendation made by the concerned authorities.

Taking note of the delay in disposal of the said application and the

mandate contained in the Circular dated 03.12.2019 requiring

such applications to be decided within a stipulated period, this

Court, vide order dated 03.03.2026, had directed the Chief

Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, to file a personal affidavit

explaining the reasons for non-disposal of the petitioner's

application within the prescribed time and to indicate the steps

taken to ensure compliance with the said circular. In compliance

thereof, the Chief Secretary has filed his personal affidavit before

this Court, the relevant portion whereof reads as follows:-

"1. That at the outset, the deponent respectfully submits that he is duty bound to follow all the directions and orders passed by this Hon'ble Court from time to time and has the deepest and highest regard for this Hon'ble Court. The deponent shall take all measures to ensure compliance with the orders and directions of this Hon'ble Court and shall leave no stone unturned to ensure that the directions of this Hon'ble Court are duly complied with.

2. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has sought grant of leave for a period of fourteen days under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Prisoners Leave Rules, 1989. It

has further been submitted by the petitioner that the application preferred by the petitioner for grant of such leave has not yet been decided by the competent authority despite remaining pending for more than four months.

3. It is most respectfully submitted that the application preferred by the petitioner for grant of parole has already been rejected by the competent authority, i.e., the District Magistrate, Bilaspur, by a detailed and well-reasoned order dated 06.03.2026, which is annexed herewith ANNEXURE A-1. A perusal of the said order would reveal that the petitioner has been convicted for the commission of offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC by judgment dated 15.04.2024 passed by the learned Trial Court.

It has further been recorded in the said order that a report was sought from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, regarding the grant of leave/parole to the petitioner. The report submitted by the SSP reveals that the statement of the victim's mother was duly recorded, wherein she has categorically stated that the present petitioner had committed the murder of her daughter and that there exists deep hostility against the petitioner in the locality. It has further been stated that in the event the petitioner is released on parole, there is a strong likelihood of occurrence of an unpleasant incident.

It has also been mentioned in the said

report that the other residents of the locality where the incident occurred have expressed similar apprehensions, stating that there is considerable anger against the petitioner. The report further indicates that in case the petitioner is released on parole, there exists a serious possibility of breach of peace as well as the possibility of the petitioner absconding.

4. It is further most respectfully submitted that the Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur has also submitted his report with respect to the present applicant/Prisoner No. 2071/136, wherein it has been stated that the local residents, senior ward members and the relatives of the victim were also consulted and they have expressed serious apprehension that in the event the petitioner is released on parole, there is a strong likelihood of breach of peace and disturbance of public tranquility in the locality.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the prevailing hostility against the petitioner in the area, the senior police authorities, including the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, have not recommended the release of the petitioner on parole. Accordingly, taking into consideration the said reports and the apprehension of breach of peace, the competent authority has rightly rejected the petitioner's application for grant of parole.

5. The order dated 06.03.2026 further discloses that the competent authority, i.e., the District

Magistrate, Bilaspur, has duly perused and appreciated the contents of the reports submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur as well as the concerned Station House Officer. Upon due consideration of the reasons assigned therein and the apprehension of breach of peace and disturbance of public tranquillity, the application preferred by the petitioner for grant of leave/parole has been rejected by the competent authority.

6. It is most respectfully submitted that, the Collector-cum- District Magistrate Bilaspur has replied to the State Government Department of Jail on the query regarding the delay in decision being taken on the petitioner's application and has submitted that, the delay accrued on account of the time consumed with respect to the procedure adopted as per Rule 6 of the Prisoners Leave Rules, 1989, which prescribe the consultation of the District Magistrate with the District Superintendent of Police on the advisability of granting the leave. It has been further stated that, as soon as the report was received, the decision was taken without any further delay. A copy of the query dated 06/03/2026 issued by the State Government, Department of Jail, to the concerned Collector/District Magistrate Bilaspur as well as the reply dated 06/03/2026 by the Collector/District Magistrate, are collectively annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A-2.

7. With respect to the circular dated 03/12/2019, being uniformly complied with in all the districts of the State, it is respectfully submitted that, a direction has been issued by the deponent on 06/03/2026 to all the District Magistrate, wherein it has been specifically instructed that, the application for grant of first leave/parole decided as early as possible preferably within 15 days.

8. It is submitted that, eight point instructions have been issued giving reference to the direction issued by the Hon'ble Court from time to time in various cases for prompt decision of the pending applications of leave/parole by prisoners. The copy of the direction dated 06/03/2026 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A-3.

9. It would be pertinent to submit here that the Government of Chhattisgarh, through the Under Secretary, Department of Jail, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar has issued circular No. Law-42014/80/2026/Jail-3 dated 06.03.2026 to all the District Magistrate, Chhattisgarh with regard to disposal of parole applications within 15 days in accordance with the provisions laid down in Prisoner's Leave Rules, 1989 and to provide information in Form-B compulsorily to Director General of Prison and Correctional Services, Chhattisgarh as well as State Government. Copy of the circular No. Law- 42014/80/2026/Jail-3 dated 06.03.2026 is filed and marked herewith as

ANNEXURE A-4 for kind perusal of the Hon'ble Court.

10. It is, therefore, most respectfully submitted that the present affidavit is true and correct to the best of the deponent's knowledge and belief. The same is being filed in bona fide compliance of the order dated 03.03.2026 passed by this Hon'ble Court. The deponent humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to take the present affidavit on record and pass such further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. From perusal of the affidavit filed by the Chief Secretary,

Government of Chhattisgarh, it is apparent that the application

preferred by the petitioner for grant of leave/parole has already

been considered and rejected by the competent authority, namely

the District Magistrate, Bilaspur, by a reasoned order dated

06.03.2026 after taking into account the reports submitted by the

Senior Superintendent of Police and the Station House Officer

concerned, which indicated apprehension of breach of peace and

disturbance of public tranquillity in the locality in the event of the

petitioner's release.

4. The affidavit further discloses that the delay in consideration of the

petitioner's application occurred on account of the time taken in

obtaining the requisite reports in accordance with Rule 6 of the

C.G. Prisoners Leave Rules, 1989, and that once such reports

were received, the decision was taken without further delay. It has

also been brought to the notice of this Court that the State

Government has issued fresh directions and circulars dated

06.03.2026 to all the District Magistrates of the State to ensure

expeditious disposal of applications seeking leave/parole,

preferably within the period of 15 days, in consonance with the

Circular dated 03.12.2019 and the directions issued by this Court

from time to time.

5. In view of the aforesaid developments, it is evident that the

grievance raised in the present petition regarding non-

consideration of the petitioner's application no longer survives.

6. Since the application for parole has been dismissed, the instant

petition has been rendered infructuous. The petitioner, however,

shall be at liberty to take recourse to such remedy as may be

available to him in accordance with law.

7. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of.
                      Sd/-                                       Sd/-
            (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)                        (Ramesh Sinha)
                   Judge                                      Chief Justice


Anu
 