Allowed

Smt. Vijaylakshmi @ Viji v. the Union of India

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2024WP/20797/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted general parole to petitioners convicted under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(b) SC/ST Act, who have been in custody for over 20 years. Directed the State to release them on parole for 90 days subject to strict conditions, acknowledging their prima facie eligibility for premature release recommendations forwarded by the State Government.

What did the court decide?

Release on general parole for 90 days subject to undertaking not to involve in unlawful activities and strict conditions stipulated.

Smt. Vijaylakshmi @ Viji Vs the Union of India — Bail and Remand | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:36355 WP No. 20797 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 20797 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. VIJAYLAKSHMI @ VIJI, W/O. GIRISHA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT VIRUPAKSHAPURA, NUGGENAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUQA, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 116.

¶8

CURRENTLY LODGED IN CENTRAL PRISON BENGALURU, (CTP NO. 8721).

¶9

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

¶10

SRI. SHASHI KUMAR, S/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, KODIDHETTIPURA VILLAGE, S.R. PATNA TALUQA, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 438.

¶11

CURRENTLY LODGED IN CENTRAL PRISON BENGALURU, (CTP NO. 16827).

¶12

RAMA @ RAMEGOWDA, S/O. SHIVANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, SHADANAHALLI VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434.

¶13

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:36355 WP No. 20797 of 2024

¶14

CURRENTLY LODGED IN CENTRAL PRISON, MYSORE, (CTP NO. 17907).

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. PRADEEP C PATIL., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY, (JUDICIAL WING), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, HALL NO.17, 2^ND FLOOR, MAJOR DHYAN CHAND NATIONAL STADIUM, INDIA GATE, NEW DELHI – 110 002.

¶19

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶20

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, NO.9, SHESHADRI ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 009.

¶21

THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BENGALURU – 560 100.

¶22

THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MYSORE – 570 002.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI.ARAVIND KAMATH, ASG FOR R1; SRI.SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP FOR R2 TO R4)

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:36355 WP No. 20797 of 2024

¶26

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 DATED 21.04.2020 VIDE NO. HD 119 PRA 2018 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE - A AND BE FURTHER PLEASED TO DIRECT THE PREMATURE RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER IN TERMS OF THE ANNEXURE – A AND ETC.,

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.

¶31

The petitioners, convicted of offences punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(b) of the SC/ST Act, and sentenced to life imprisonment, are before this Court seeking a directive for their release on general parole pending consideration of their case for premature release. The petitioners have been in judicial custody for over 20 years. As per the guidelines issued by the Government of Karnataka, they are entitled to consideration for premature release, and the State Government has recommended their premature release to the Central Government.

¶32

The petitioners' grievance is that the Central Government has not taken any action on the recommendation forwarded by the State Government. The petitioners have established a prima facie case for granting parole. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:36355 WP No. 20797 of 2024

¶35

ORDER

¶36

a. The Writ Petition is allowed.

¶37

b. Respondents are hereby directed to release the petitioners/convicts on parole for a period of 90 days from the date of their release, subject to petitioners undertaking not to involve in unlawful activities during the parole.

¶38

c. Respondents shall stipulate strict conditions as are usually stipulated to ensure their return to the prison and the convicts shall not commit any other offence during the period of parole.

¶39

d. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the jail authorities, by way of electronic mail, forthwith.

¶40

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

¶41

f. The petitioners are at liberty to seek extension of parole.

¶42

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶43

RKA

¶44

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53

Smt. Vijaylakshmi @ Viji v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vijaylakshmi @ Viji v. the Union of India

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

A Jayasree Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.K.H.Hanumanthaiah Vs Sri.Prakashchand

Sri M P Krishne Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

The Karnataka Lpg Cng Retrofitters Association Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Sushil P Mantri Vs Union of India

Sri Mailvaganan Vs Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd.