[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shoba vs State Of Karnataka on 24 March, 2026

Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty

                                                  -1-
                                                               NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630
                                                         WP No. 200934 of 2026


                      HC-KAR




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                         KALABURAGI BENCH

                               DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

                                               BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 200934 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
                      BETWEEN:

                            SMT. SHOBA
                            W/O RUDRAGOUDA D PATIL, @ R D PATIL,
                            AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O SONNA,
                            SOAN KALABURAGI - 585310.
                                                                  ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. MANVENDRA REDDY.,ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                            BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
                            VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001
Digitally signed by
NIJAMUDDIN
JAMKHANDI             2.    THE ADDITIONAL GENERAL OF POLICE
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                    AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE OF PRISON,
KARNATAKA
                            NO 4, SHESHADRI ROAD, BANGALORE 560009

                      3.    THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT
                            CENTRAL PRISON, KALABURAGI 585308.

                      4.    THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT
                            CENTRAL PRISON, MYSURU - 570001.
                                                                  ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI MALHARA RAO AAG A/W
                           SRI SESHADRI JAISHANKAR M, AGA)
                                -2-
                                          NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630
                                      WP No. 200934 of 2026


HC-KAR




     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, I)
ISSUE    A WRIT   OF CERTIORARI QUASHING         THE ORDER
PERMITTING TRANSFER OF THE UNDER-TRIAL PRISONER R.D
PATIL FROM CENTRAL PRISON KALABURAGI TO MYSURU
PRISON BY THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
KALABURAGI DATED 27-01-2026 VIDE ANNEXURE-F II) ISSUE
A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO RE-
TRANSFER THE UNDER TRIAL PRISONER BACK TO CENTRAL
PRISON KALABURAGI, III) DIRECT AUTHORITIES TO ENSURE
MEDICAL     TREATMENT    AND    PRODUCTION    BEFORE    LOCAL
COURTS, IV) GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF DEEMED FIT.

     THIS    PETITION,    COMING     ON   FOR    PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY


                         ORAL ORDER

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227

of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

"I) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order permitting transfer of the under-trial prisoner R.D Patil from Central Prison Kalaburagi to Mysuru Prison by the Prl. District and Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi dated 27-01-2026 vide Annexure-F

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630

HC-KAR

II) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents to re-transfer the under trial prisoner back to central prison Kalaburagi,

III) Direct authorities to ensure medical treatment and production before local Courts,

IV) grant any other relief deemed fit"

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of the

respondents.

3. Petitioner, who is the wife of under trial prisoner

R.D. Patil, who has been arrested and remanded to

custody in Crime No.160/2023 registered By Ashoknagar

Police Station, Kalaburagi, has approached this Court,

assailing the order at Annexure-F dated 27.01.2026,

passed by learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Kalaburagi on the requisition submitted by the respondent

No.3.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance

on the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

the case of Reeshan Thajuddin Sheikh v. The State of

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630

HC-KAR

Karnataka and Ors. in WP No.24840/2025, submits

that since no opportunity of being heard was given to the

petitioner prior to passing the order impugned, the same

is liable to be set aside. He also submits that the learned

Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi has

passed the impugned order without proper application of

mind and without assigning any reasons. Accordingly, he

prays allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General

has argued in support of impugned order. However, he

does not dispute the fact that petitioner was not granted

an opportunity of being heard before passing the

impugned order.

6. Material on the record would go to show that the

respondent No.3 had submitted a requisition to the

learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi

on 24.01.2026 with a request to permit jail authorities to

transfer the husband of the petitioner, i.e. aforesaid R. D.

Patil, from Kalaburagi Central Jail to Mysore Central Jail.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630

HC-KAR

Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi

has made an endorsement on the said requisition on

27.01.2026 stating "permitted".

7. Undisputedly, the petitioner was not heard in the

matter before the learned Principal District and Sessions

Judge, Kalaburagi had permitted the respondent No.3 to

transfer the petitioner from Kalaburagi Central Jail to

Mysore Central Jail. The learned Principal District and

Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi has not assigned any reasons

for permitting the respondent No.3 to shift/transfer the

under trial prisoner namely R.D. Patil from Kalaburagi

Central Jail to Mysore Central Jail. In paragraph Nos.8 to

10 of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court in WP No.24840/2025, it is held as under:

"8. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner was never served with a copy of the requisition made by the Chief Superintendent of Central Prison, Bengaluru, nor was he given an opportunity to contest the grounds urged therein. The petitioner was thus denied his right to be heard

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630

HC-KAR

before an order adversely affecting him was passed. This omission goes to the root of the matter, as the order impugned is not preceded by compliance with the principles of natural justice. Furthermore, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge merely records the phrase "security reasons" as the ground for transfer. It neither discloses the nature of such security threat nor demonstrates an application of judicial mind to the materials placed by the prison authorities. Such a cryptic recital falls short of the standards required when fundamental rights under Article 21 are at stake.

9. An under-trial prisoner continues to enjoy all constitutional protections, save those which are necessarily curtailed by the fact of lawful custody. The right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 encompasses the right to fair procedure, humane treatment, and protection against arbitrary exercise of power. If the transfer of an under-trial prisoner is to be ordered, the Court must balance the security concerns projected by the authorities with the legitimate rights of the prisoner to education, rehabilitation, family visitation, and access to legal assistance. In the instant case, the order impugned does not reflect any such balancing exercise. Instead, it proceeds on a bare assertion of "security

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630

HC-KAR

reasons" without disclosing the factual basis for such conclusion.

10. This Court is therefore of the considered opinion

that the learned Sessions Judge has failed to

discharge the obligation of applying his mind fairly

and objectively, and has also denied the petitioner

an opportunity to be heard before effecting his

transfer. The impugned order has thus resulted in

serious prejudice to the petitioner, who as an under-

trial prisoner retains his right to fair procedure.

Accordingly, the order dated 05.08.2025 directing

the transfer of the petitioner from Bengaluru Central

Prison to Belagavi Central Prison is unsustainable in

law. The petitioner is entitled to be re-transferred to

Bengaluru central Prison."

8. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that

the impugned order passed by the learned Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi cannot be

sustained. Accordingly, the following:

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630

HC-KAR

ORDER

i. The writ petition is allowed.

ii. The impugned order at Annexure-F, dated

27.01.2026 passed by learned Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi

permitting the respondent No.3 to

shift/transfer the under-trial prisoner, R.D.

Patil, who is the husband of the petitioner

from Kalaburagi Central Jail to Mysore

Central Jail stands quashed.

iii. The respondents are directed to re-transfer

the under trial prisoner i.e. aforesaid R. D.

Patil, from Mysore Central Jail to Kalaburagi

Central Jail forthwith. Liberty is however

granted to the concerned authorities to

take appropriate action for transfer of the

under trial prisoner R.D. Patil from

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2630

HC-KAR

Kalaburagi Central Jail to any other Central

Jail in accordance with law.

Sd/-