Allowed

Sri. Mariswamy v. the Chief Superintendent Central Prison

Karnataka HC1 Oct 2024WP/20002/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by a life convict seeking extension of parole. Established that the petitioner had no prior parole violations. Directed the first respondent to release him on general parole for thirty days to complete his house renovation, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on general parole for 30 days from date of release; directed to mark weekly attendance before jurisdictional police.

Sri. Mariswamy Vs the Chief Superintendent Central Prison — Karnataka HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:40878 WP No. 20002 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 20002 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SRI. MARISWAMY S/O MARISHETTY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O DODDAMALUR VILLAGE, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA-572 104 PRESENTLY IN CENTRAL JAIL CTP NO.10434, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, BENGALURU-560 100.

¶6

…PETITIONER

¶7

(BY SRI. SHIVA PRASAD S., ADVOCATE)

¶8

AND:

¶9

THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON PARAPPANA AGRAHARA ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BANGALORE-560 100.

¶10

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

THE POLICE SUPERINTENDENT MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA-571 401.

¶12

THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR HALAGURU POLICE STATION, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 421.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP)

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO R-1 TO EXTEND THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PAROLE OF PETITIONER PERTAINING TO THE ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO.BCP/CTP-SEC/657/2023 DATED 20.12.2023 AT ANNX-B AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON GENERAL PAROLE FOR A

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:40878 WP No. 20002 of 2024

¶18

PERIOD OF ANOTHER 30 DAYS WITHOUT REFERRING THE MATTER TOT EH R-3 POLICE.

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State.

¶23

The petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.

¶24

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking for a directive to the respondents for extension of parole granted earlier for a period 30 days citing that he has to oversee renovation of his house which is in a dilapidated condition. This Court in W.P.No.3969/2024 by order dated 14.03.2024 granted parole for a period of 30 days, to enable the petitioner to oversee renovation of his house. The petitioner seeks parole for a further period of 30 days stating that renovation of his house is yet to be completed and his presence is required for completion of renovation. The petitioner asserts that he is in judicial custody for more than eight years and there is no record of violation of conditions of parole granted earlier. Therefore, petitioner has established a prima facie case to release him on parole.

¶25

Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER

¶26

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶27

¶28

NC: 2024:KHC:40878 WP No. 20002 of 2024

¶29

ii) The respondent No.1 is hereby directed to release the petitioner-Mariswamy (CTP No.10434) on parole for a period of thirty days (30 days) from the date of his release subject to condition that he shall not involve in any unlawful activities during the period of parole.

¶30

iii) The respondent No.1 is at liberty to impose conditions as are imposed normally at the time of grant of parole, so as to ensure the return of the petitioner to the prison and the convicts shall not commit any other offence during the period of parole.

¶31

iv) The petitioner shall mark his attendance every week before the jurisdictional police.

¶32

iv) The Registry to communicate this order to the Jail Authority through electronic mail. Any violation of the condition would result in cancellation of the parole.

¶33

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶34

ST List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3

Sri. Mariswamy v. the Chief Superintendent Central Prison

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Mariswamy v. the Chief Superintendent Central Prison

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Abhishek @ Abhijit Chowdari Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Gangadharaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. S. Nagaraj, Vs Indian Bank

Sri S Nagesh Vs Muthoot Housing Finance Company Ltd.

Sri. Nagappa Vs the Principal Secretary

Waseem Pasha Vs State of Karnataka