Allowed

Chandru v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2024WP/20238/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the writ petition filed by a life convict seeking parole. The court quashed the police report denying parole and directed the release of the petitioner for 90 days due to the illness of his minor daughter, citing satisfactory conduct and lack of male family members.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; police report quashed; petitioner released on parole for 90 days; strict conditions imposed; liberty to seek extension reserved.

Chandru Vs the State of Karnataka — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:50447 WP No. 20238 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 20238 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

CHANDRU S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT CHANNASANDRA, KADUGODI POST, BANGALORE - 560067

¶7

PRESENT ADDRESS BAVANI TALKIES, KARANJIKATTE, KOLAR-563101 NOW IN CENTRAL PRISON HAVING CTP NO.9897, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, BENGALURU-560100

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAO LOKANDE N., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Location: HIGH REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, COURT OF KARNATAKA HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶12

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563101.

¶13

THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON PARAPPANA AGARAHARA BENGALURU-560100.

¶14

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:50447 WP No. 20238 of 2024

¶17

KARNATAKA PRISON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, SHESHADRI ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001.

¶18

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VEMAGAL POLICE STATION, KOLAR-563101

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. K.P.YOGANNA, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS.)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W 482OF Cr.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE POLICE REPORT DTD: 10.06.24 ISSUED BY THE R2 BEARING NO. DCRB/PAROLE/05/24 (PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-D) TO THE WP AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DTD 05.07.24 ISSUED BY THE R3 BEARING NO. BCP/CTP/SEC/39/2024 (PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-E) TO THE WP.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondentState.

¶26

The petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.

¶27

The petitioner is seeking a directive for his release on parole, citing the illness of his minor daughter and the need to fulfill his family obligations by providing support and care. He contends that there are no other male members available

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:50447 WP No. 20238 of 2024

¶30

to look after his family. The petitioner has served more than nine years of his sentence as of today and has not been released on parole previously. The imprisonment certificate indicates that the petitioner’s conduct has been satisfactory.

¶31

In light of the circumstances, the petitioner has

¶32

established a prima facie case for his release on parole.

¶33

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

a. The Writ Petition is allowed .

¶36

b. The police report dated 10.06.2024 issued by respondent No.2 is hereby quashed.

¶37

c. Respondent No.3 is directed to release the convict CTP No.9897 on parole for a period of 90 days from the date of release, subject to petitioner undertaking not to involve in unlawful activities during the period of parole.

¶38

d. Respondent No.3 shall impose strict conditions as are usually stipulated to ensure the return of the detenue to the jail and the convict shall not commit any other offence during the period of parole.

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC:50447 WP No. 20238 of 2024

¶41

e. Violation of any of the parole conditions would result in cancellation of parole.

¶42

f. Liberty is reserved with the petitioner to seek extension of parole, if permissible in law.

¶43

g. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to prison authorities, by way of electronic mail, forthwith.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶46

MBM

Chandru v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandru v. the State of Karnataka

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

Victory Sports and Cultural Association Club Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri S a Veerabhadra Prasad Vs the Commissioner of Endowments

Sri. T. R. Vishnumurthy Vs Union Bank of India

Vinod Ramnani Vs State Bank of India

M/S Muthoottu Mini Financiers Ltd. Vs Union of India

Susheela Udupa Vs the President and Executive Director Udupi Power Corporation Ltd.