Dismissed

Ramu v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Mar 2026WP/1030/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Chief Superintendent of Prison to grant general parole for 90 days. The court held the petition is premature and not maintainable as the petitioner failed to exhaust the alternative statutory remedy of applying to jail authorities first.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as premature; liberty reserved to approach competent jail authorities.

Ramu Vs the State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:17060 WP No. 1030 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 1030 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

RAMU

¶10

S/O KAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT 1ST CROSS, TELEPHONE LAYOUT, SRINIVAS NAGAR, PIPELINE, SUNKADAKATTE, BENGALURU - 560 091.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAO LOKANDE N, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶16

REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:17060 WP No. 1030 of 2026

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT

¶21

CENTRAL PRISON, PARAPPANA AGARAHARA, BENGALURU - 560 100.

¶22

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KARNATAKA PRISON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, SHESHADRI ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶23

STATE OF KARNATAKA KAMAKSHIPALYA POLICE

¶24

BENGALURU - 560 079.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

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

¶27

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

¶28

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON GENERAL PAROLE FOR 90 DAYS (CONSIDERING PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-D) TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.,

¶29

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

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶31

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:17060 WP No. 1030 of 2026

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

The captioned writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondent No.3 to release the petitioner on general parole for a period of 90 days.

¶36

Learned Additional Government Advocate, on perusal of the writ papers, submits that the petitioner has approached this Court without first availing the statutory remedy of submitting an application for parole before the competent jail authorities, as contemplated under the relevant prison rules.

¶37

Having considered the submissions and examined the material placed on record, this Court finds merit in the objection raised by the learned Additional Government Advocate. The petitioner has not exhausted the efficacious alternative remedy available under the statutory framework. In the absence of any application made before the competent authority, the present writ petition is clearly premature and not maintainable.

¶38

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:17060 WP No. 1030 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

It is well settled that the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not to be invoked in the first instance, particularly when the statute provides a specific mechanism for redressal of the grievance. Entertaining such petitions would amount to bypassing the prescribed procedure and render the statutory scheme nugatory.

¶42

Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as premature. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the competent jail authorities by submitting an appropriate application seeking grant of general parole, in accordance with law.

¶43

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶44

HDK

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Ramu v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramu 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

M/S. Greenergy Bio Refineries Private Limited Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Saraswathi K Vs the Chairman and the Deputy Commissioner

Smt. Narayanamma Vs the Special Land Acquisition OFFICER-1

Dr. Naveen Kumar N Vs the Regional Passport Officer

M/S Hoskote Industries Welfare Form Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Kona Eswara Reddy Vs Union Bank of India