Eshwaramma W/O Naganagowda v. State of Karnataka
Case brief
What is this about?
Keywords: general parole; parole versus suspension of sentence and bail; pendency of criminal appeal no bar to parole; time-bound nature of parole (30/60/90 days); reasoned order requirement for parole rejection; Karnataka Prison Manual Chapter XXXIV Sections 635, 636, 637, 643; illness of convict's mother; Article 226 and 227 Constitution of India; writ petition (GM-POLICE); High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench; Justice Suraj Govindaraj; CTP No.13583; S.C.No.7/2021 Sections 341 and 302 IPC; Criminal Appeal No.100176/2024; Arjun S/o Lakkappa Hurakannavar v. State of Karnataka, W.P. No.20180/2023 (relied on). Core holding: parole application maintainable despite pending appeal and absence of bail/suspension application; rejection ignoring convict's mother's illness set aside; 60-day parole granted with weekly attendance condition.
What did the court decide?
Respondent No.2 (Chief Superintendent, Central Prison, Bellari) directed to release the petitioner's son Siddanagouda (CTP No.13583) on general parole for 60 days (instead of the 90 days sought) from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, to take care of his mother's illness, subject to conditions: (a) weekly once marking of attendance at the jurisdictional Police Station throughout parole, with the jurisdictional Police responsible for taking him to gaol if he evades return after expiry; (b) Respondent No.2 to stipulate usual strict conditions to ensure return to gaol and that he commits no other offence during parole; (c) registry to communicate the order to the prison authority for immediate execution.