Karnataka High Court
Sri Anappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 March, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:10148
WP No. 6631 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 6631 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
SRI. ANNAPPA
S/O MANNAIAH,
AGED 39 YEARS,
CURRENTLY SERVING LIFE IMPRISONMENT IN
OPEN AIR PRISON,
DEVANAHALLI,
BENGALURU RURAL-562 110.
PERMANENT R/AT
MALIGANADU, BALUR HOBLI,
MUDIGERE TALUK,
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 550
...PETITIONER
Digitally signed (BY SRI. PRADEEP PATIL, ADVOCATE)
by NAGAVENI
Location: High AND:
Court of
Karnataka
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
HOME DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE LIFE CONVICTS PREMATURE RELEASE
COMMITTEE,
HOME DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:10148
WP No. 6631 of 2025
BENGALURU-560 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES,
NO. 9, SHESHADRI ROAD,
GANDHI NAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 009.
4. THE SUPERINTENDENT
OPEN AIR PRISON
DEVANAHALLI,
BENGALURU RURAL -562 110.
5. THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT,
CENTRAL PRISON,
BENGALURU-560 100
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION IN THE
NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS TO BE
PLEASED TO ACT IN STRICT COMPLIANCE OF THE
NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. HD 119 PRA 2018, BENGALURU,
DATED 21.04.2020 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND BE
FURTHER PLEASED TO DIRECT THE PREMATURE RELEASE OF
THE PETITIONER IN TERMS OF THE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:10148
WP No. 6631 of 2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court seeking extension
of parole so granted by the co-ordinate bench of this Court
in W.P.No.27913/2024. The co-ordinate bench while
granting parole has observed as follows:
"3. The case of the petitioner for premature release
has been recommended by the Advisory Committee and is
currently pending consideration before the second respondent.
4. In the identical circumstances, the Apex court in
the case of RASHIDUL JAFAR @ CHOTA Vs. STATE OF
UTTAR PRADESH & ANR in W.P.(Criminal)No.336/2019 has
directed as follows:
"(i) All cases for premature release of convicts undergoing
imprisonment for life in the present batch of cases shall
be considered in terms of the policy dated 1 August 2018,
as amended, subject to the observations which are
contained herein. The restriction that a life convict is not
eligible for premature release until attaining the age of
sixty years, which was introduced by the policy of 28 July
2021, stands deleted by the amendment dated 27 May
2022. Hence, no case for premature release shall be
rejected on that ground;
(ii) In the event that any convict is entitled to more liberal
benefits by any of the amendments which have been
brought about subsequent to the policy dated 1 August
2018, the case for the grant of premature release would
be considered by granting benefit in terms of more liberal
amended para/clause of the policies. All decisions of
premature release of convicts, including those, beyond
the present batch of cases would be entitled to such a
beneficial reading of the policy;
(iii) In terms of para 4 of the policy dated 1 August 2018,
no application is required to be submitted by a convict
undergoing life imprisonment for premature release.
Further, through amendment dated 28 July 2021, para
3(i), which included convicts undergoing life imprisonment
who have not filed application for pre-mature release in
NC: 2025:KHC:10148
the prohibited category, has specifically been deleted.
Accordingly, all cases of convicts undergoing life sentence
in the State of Uttar Pradesh who are eligible for being
considered for premature release in terms of the policy,
including but not confined to the five hundred and twelve
prisoners involved in the present batch of cases, shall be
considered in terms of the procedure for premature
release stipulated in the policy;
(iv) The District Legal Services Authorities in the State of
Uttar Pradesh shall take necessary steps in coordination
with the jail authorities to ensure that all eligible cases of
prisoners who would be entitled to premature release in
terms of the applicable policies, as noticed above, would
be duly considered and no prisoner, who is otherwise
eligible for being considered, shall be excluded from
consideration.
(v) These steps to be taken by DLSAs would, include but
not be limited to, Secretaries of DLSAs seeking status
report on all prisoners undergoing life imprisonment in the
prisons falling under their jurisdiction in terms of the
format of table prepared in Annexure-A covering the
details mentioned in para 13 of this judgment and
ensuring its submission by relevant authorities within
eight weeks of this order as well as on an annual basis.
Further, DLSAs would utilize this status report to monitor
and engage with respective authorities to ensure the
implementation of our directions to ensure premature
release in terms of applicable policies in all eligible cases
of convicts undergoing life sentence on a continuous
basis;
(vi) The applications for premature release shall be
considered expeditiously. Those cases which have already
been processed and in respect of which reports have been
submitted shall be concluded and final decisions intimated
to the convict no later than within a period of one month
from the date of this order. Cases of eligible life convicts
who are (i) above the age of seventy years; or (ii)
suffering from terminal ailments shall be taken up on
priority and would be disposed of within a period of two
months. The Uttar Pradesh State Legal Services Authority
shall, within a period of two weeks, lay down the priorities
according to which all other pending cases shall be
disposed of. All other cases shall, in any event, be
disposed of within a period of four months from the date
of this order; and
(vii) Where any convict undergoing life imprisonment has
already been released on bail by the orders of this Court,
the order granting interim bail shall continue to remain in
operation until the disposal of the application for
premature release."
NC: 2025:KHC:10148
5. In the identical circumstances the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court by following the decision of the Apex
Court in the case of RASHIDUL JAFAR (SUPRA) has issued
a direction to respondent No.1-State therein directing as
follows:
"10. On a coalesce of what the Apex Court has considered
in all the afore-quoted judgments, what would
unmistakably emerge is that cases of life convicts who are
entitled for consideration of their premature release,
should be considered without any loss of time. In the
case at hand, the Committee has not met for the last 8
months which has resulted in plethora of cases being filed
before this Court seeking a mandamus only to place those
applications before the committee in the ensuing meeting.
When the meeting would ensue the State itself is not
aware, as no concrete date is being divulged for the
committee to meet. In the afore-said circumstances, I
deem it appropriate to direct the State Government to
henceforth direct the 2nd respondent/Committee to meet
at least 6 times a year - once in two months, so that
those application/s are considered at the right time on
their individual merit and cases being filed only to place
the application/s before the committee would be obviated.
Till such time that the application of the petitioner would
merit consideration before the committee, he would be
entitled to be released on 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 consider
the case of the petitioner.
6. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition is disposed.
(ii) A mandamus issues to the 1st respondent-State to
direct the Committee to meet on or before 10th April,
2023 and consider the case of the petitioner and the like,
whose cases are placed before it, for consideration of his
case for remission/premature release.
(iii) It is made clear that the State Government shall
henceforth, direct the 2nd respondent/Committee to meet
once in two months, in the light of the directions issued
by the Apex Court in the cases referred to in the course of
the order.
(iv) The directions shall be adhered to from the 1st of
April, 2023.
(v) The petitioner shall be considered for his release
on general parole, in accordance with law, till the
committee meets and considers his application for his
premature release.
NC: 2025:KHC:10148
(vi) The Registry is directed to communicate the order
to the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Home
Affairs, Government of Karnataka, Bengaluru for its
compliance."
7. The respondent therein considered the petitioner
therein for release on general parole in accordance with law, till
the committee considers the application for premature release.
8. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in its order
dated 02.03.2023 clarified that the petitioner therein shall be
released on parole forthwith, till his case is considered by the
Committee.
9. The petitioner has established a prima facie case
for granting parole. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
a. The Writ Petition is allowed.
b. Respondents are hereby directed to release the
petitioner/convict on parole for a period of 90 days from
the date of his release, subject to petitioner undertaking
not to involve in unlawful activities during the parole.
c. Respondents shall stipulate strict conditions as
are usually stipulated to ensure his return to the prison
and the convict shall not commit any other offence
during the period of parole.
d. The petitioner is at liberty to seek extension of
parole.
The registry to communicate this order to the
Respondents through electronic mail. "
2. It is an admitted fact that the case of the
petitioner has been recommended for premature release
and is pending at the hands of the competent authority.
In that light, the co-ordinate bench had granted the
NC: 2025:KHC:10148
petitioner parole for a period of ninety days which is said
to expire today i.e. on 11.03.2025.
3. In the light of the matter pending before the
Committee even today, I deem it appropriate to extend
the parole for another ninety days from 12.03.2025 to
09.06.2025, on the same conditions as imposed by the co-
ordinate bench of this court in W.P.No.27913/2024.
4. It is further directed that the Committee shall
consider the cases of those persons who are
recommended for premature release without brooking any
further delay, at any rate within four weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of the order.
5. With the aforesaid observations, the petition
stands disposed.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
______________________
JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
