Orissa High Court
Nilu @ Tarkeswar Kumar vs State Of Odisha & Others on 25 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WPCRL No.127 of 2023
Nilu @ Tarkeswar Kumar .... Petitioner
Choudhury
Mr. Lalitendu Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Arupananda Das
Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 25.09.2023
02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State.
Issue notice to the opposite parties on the
question of admission indicating therein that the
matter shall be disposed of at the stage of admission.
Let three extra copies of the writ petition be served on
the learned counsel for the State.
This writ petition in the nature of habeas corpus
has been filed by the petitioner Nilu @ Tarkeswar
Kumar Choudhury for challenging the order dated
02.02.2023 passed by the Deputy Inspector General
// 2 //
of Prisons (Headquarters) under Annexure-1 in
rejecting his case for premature release from the jail
custody on the ground of adverse report of district
authorities.
It appears from the averments taken in the writ
petition that the petitioner faced trial in the Court of
learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela in S.T. Case
No.118/45/2001 and he was found guilty for the
offence under section 396 of the Indian Penal Code,
section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, section 25
of the Arms Act read with section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment
for life. The judgment was pronounced on
19.07.2004.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has completed twenty three years in jail
in connection with the case and during stay in the jail,
he has been released on interim bail for a period of
one month as per the orders of this Court and
thereafter he surrendered at right time.
A specific averment has been taken in the writ
petition that one of the co-convicts, namely, Gopal
Mahakud, who was also sentenced to life
imprisonment for similar offences, has been
prematurely released by the D.I.G. of Prisons,
Headquarters vide memo no.20010/J/R-89/2014
dated 21.11.2019.
// 3 //
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that it
appears from the Annexure-1 that the sole ground of
rejection of premature release by the State Sentence
Review Board, which was held on 13.01.2023, was
the adverse report of the district authorities.
When a query was made to the learned counsel
for the State as to whether there is any rule framed or
any scheme of remission or any guideline issued by
the Government on premature release of the convict,
learned counsel for the State drew our attention to
the Guideline for Premature Release, 2022
(hereinafter "2022 Guideline") which was published in
the Extraordinary Gazette of Odisha dated
19.04.2022, wherein under clause no.6,
categorization of prisoners for premature release has
been made and it is stated that convicts who have
been imprisoned for life, inter alia, in case like dacoity
with murder, their cases for premature release will be
considered after completion of twenty five years of
incarceration. Since as per the averments taken in the
writ petition, similarly situated co-convict Gopal
Mahakud was released prematurely prior to the
completion of twenty five years of incarceration, we
are of the prima facie view that the Government is not
strictly following 2022 Guideline while considering the
case of premature release in case of life convicts
mentioned under clauses 6(a) to (e). The said 2022
// 4 //
Guideline as submitted by the learned counsel for the
State is taken on record.
At this stage, learned counsel for the State has
produced the written instruction dated 21.11.2022
received from the Superintendent of Police, Rourkela
and pointed out that the adverse report against the
petitioner indicates that the Superintendent of Police,
Rourkela entrusted enquiry to the Inspector in-charge
of R.N. Pali police station on the premature release
proposal and the enquiry report was submitted which
indicated that law and order problems cannot be ruled
out if the petitioner is released prematurely and there
is apprehension that the petitioner keeping personal
grudge over the informant and his family members
and that the petitioner might not lead a honest
livelihood.
When a further query is made to the learned
counsel for the State as to whether copy of the
enquiry report of the Inspector in-charge of R.N. Pali
police station was supplied to the petitioner to have
his say on the matter and whether the petitioner was
given any opportunity of hearing on the adverse
report, learned counsel seeks some time to obtain
instruction on the same.
When the learned counsel for the petitioner was
asked whether any criminal appeal was preferred by
the petitioner against the judgment of the learned
// 5 //
trial Court and if so, what is the result of the appeal,
he submitted that he has instruction that a criminal
appeal was preferred by the petitioner before this
Court and the same was dismissed but he wants to
file an affidavit to that effect showing the case
number, date of disposal etc. and other details.
Learned counsel for the State seeks time to file a
counter affidavit to the writ petition.
List this matter in the week commencing from
30th October 2023.
Counter affidavit, if any, be filed in the meantime
giving a copy thereof to the learned counsel for the
petitioner in advance and if he so likes, he can file a
rejoinder.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
( S. S. Mishra)
Judge
sipun
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 26-Sep-2023 17:28:53
