Ningappa B Noolvi S/O Basavantappa Vs State of Karnataka

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.02 TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER S

¶21

2 -

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC-D:12924 WP No. 102104 of 2025

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

SON ACCUSED NO.01 GANGADHAR NOOLVI (CTP NO.5108) ON REGULAR PAROLE IN SC NO.84/2021 PASSED BY THE HON BLE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD FOR 60 DAYS AS PER ANNEXURE-F IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. (B) SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS DEEMED FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO RETURN THE LAND.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THERIN AS UNDER:

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

¶28

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶29

a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing Respondent No.02 to release the Petitioner’s son Accused No.01 Gangadhar Noolvi (CTP No.5108) on regular parole in Sc No.84/2021 passed by the Hon’ble III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad for 60 days as per annexure-f in the interest of justice.

¶30

b. Such other order or direction as deemed fit under the facts and circumstance of the case or in the alternative to return the land.

¶31

The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P. No.101053/2025 seeking parole. By order dated 12.02.2025, this Court granted 30 days' parole, with

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12924 WP No. 102104 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

liberty to seek extension. The convict availed of the said parole and duly surrendered to the jail authorities within the stipulated period. There is no material on record indicating any misconduct or complaint against the convict during the said parole period.

¶35

The convict has previously availed 30 days of regular parole and 15 days of medical parole. Considering his satisfactory conduct during these periods, the present request for further parole merits favourable consideration. Accordingly, this Court directs that Gangadhar Noolvi (CTP No.5108) shall be released on regular parole for a period of 45 days, commencing from 26.09.2025, subject to the following conditions:

¶36

i. The convict shall mark his attendance in the jurisdictional police station, weekly once throughout the period of his parole and it would be the responsibility of the jurisdictional police to take him to gaol, in the event, the convict (CTP No.5108) would evade going back to the gaol, after the expiry of the period of parole.

¶37

ii. Respondent No.2 shall stipulate strict conditions as are usually stipulated, to ensure return of the

¶38

4 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC-D:12924 WP No. 102104 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

detenue to the gaol and that he shall not commit any other offence during the period of parole.

¶42

iii. Registry is directed to communicate this order to respondent No.2, by way of electronic mail, forthwith.

¶43

iv. The petitioner is at liberty to seek extension of parole, which shall be considered looking at the conduct of the convict while he is out on parole.

¶44

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶45

VB CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Ningappa B Noolvi S/O Basavantappa v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ningappa B Noolvi S/O Basavantappa v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Usha Bhaskar Bhakta Vs the Divisional Controller

Anil Mallanagouda Patil Vs the Union of India

Nagappa S/O Bheemappa Kadakola Vs Smt Indramma W/O Prakash Katagi

Ganapati S/O Baburao Gunde Vs Rudresh S/O Irappa Byadagi

Nagaraj S/O Dattaram Palankar Vs Vinay S/O Dattaram Palankar

Sri. a Bhupal Reddy S/O Late Rami Reddy Vs the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)