[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Frank Anthony @ Frank vs State Of Karnataka on 1 December, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:49895
WP No. 19387 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 19387 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
SRI FRANK ANTHONY @ FRANK
S/O RAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
NOW IN CENTRAL PRISON,
CTP NO 12298
PARAPPANA AGARAHARA
BENGALURU - 560 100.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI TIGADI VEERANNA GADIGEPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed
by SHWETHA REPRESENTED BY
RAGHAVENDRA
ITS SECRETARY,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT
CENTRAL PRISON,
PARAPPANA AGRAHARA,
BENGALURU - 560 100.
3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:49895
WP No. 19387 of 2025
HC-KAR
KARNATAKA PRISON AND
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES,
BENGALURU - 560 100.
4. THE ADVISORY BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
KARNATAKA PRISON AND
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES,
BENGALURU - 560 100.
5. THE LIFE CONVICTS
RELEASE COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.K.P.YASHODHA, AGA)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1) ISSUE A WRIT
OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT
DATED 30.04.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2
BEARING NO.CPB/CTP-SEC/1804/2025 (PRODUCED
ANNEXURE-D) TO THE WRIT PETITION; II) ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO.4 AND 5 TO
CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER HAVING CTP
NO.12298 FOR PREMATURE RELEASE INDEPENDENTLY IN THE
LIGHT OF THE ORDER AND DIRECTION PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO. 29219/2024 DATED
28.11.2024 WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE
F TO THE WRIT PETITION; (III) ISSUE A
WIRT/ORDER/DIRECTION FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO
RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON GENERAL PAROLE, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, FOR A PERIOD THAT, THE
AUTHORITIES OF THE JAIL WOULD PRESCRIBE OR TILL SUCH
TIME, THE COMMITTEE WOULD MEET AND RECOMMENDS THE
CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR PREMATURE RELEASE.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:49895
WP No. 19387 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner, wife of the detenue - Frank Anthony, CTP
No.12298 is before this Court seeking for the following
reliefs:
"i). Issue a Writ of Certiorai and quash the
impugned endorsement dated 30.04.2025 issued
by the Respondent No.2 bearing No.CPB/CTP-
Sec/1804/2025 (produced vide "ANNEXURE -
D") to the Writ Petition;
ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the
respondents No.4 & 5 to consider the case of the
petitioner having CTP No.12298 for premature
release independently in the light of the order and
direction passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ
Petition No.29219/2024 dated 28.11.2024 which is
produced and marked as ANNEXURE - "F", to
the Writ Petition.
iii) Issue a Writ / order / direction for the
Respondent No.2 to release the petitioner on
general parole, in accordance with law, for a
period that, the Authorities of the jail would
prescribe or till such time, the committee would
meet and recommends the case of the petitioner
for premature release.
iv) Issue any other writ or order or direction that
deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case
in the interest of justice.
NC: 2025:KHC:49895
HC-KAR
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the application
filed by the detenue for premature release is not been
considered by the respondents on the ground that the
detenue has been convicted in two matters for the
offences punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.
3. The submissions of Sri Tigadi Veeranna Gadigeppa,
learned counsel for the petitioner is that, when appeals
had been filed in Crl.A.No.529/2022 along with
Crl.A.No.534/2022, by the detenue, the division bench of
this Court had categorically observed and granted liberty
to the detenue to seek for remission, which the State
Government was required to consider in terms of the
Order No.HD 138 PRA 2013, Bengaluru, dated
07.01.2014 and the application could not have been
rejected in limine, but ought to have been placed before
the Advisory Board.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that
whenever there is conviction and sentencing made in
respect of offences involving two or more deaths, which
NC: 2025:KHC:49895
HC-KAR
are punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, the
Authorities normally reject the application.
5. Though that may be the case, in the present matter, the
division bench has specifically directed that the detenue
could claim remission and directed the State Government
to consider the same and when such a direction had been
issued, it was for the respondents to have placed the
application of the detenue before the Advisory Board,
who should have considered the matter on merit and not
for the respondents to reject the same in limine, as is
done in the present matter. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) A certiorari is issued and the endorsement
dated 30.04.2025 issued by respondent
No.2 bearing No.CPB/CTP-Sec/1804/2025
vide Annexure 'D' is quashed.
(iii) Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are directed to
place the application of the detenue for
remission and premature release before
NC: 2025:KHC:49895
HC-KAR
the Advisory Board in the next meeting of
the said Board, in terms of the judgment
passed by the division bench in
Crl.A.Nos.529/2022 c/w. 534/2022.
SD/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
NVJ
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 31
