Disposed¶33

Promad Y v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jan 2026WP/37771/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Emergency parole; judicial custody; CTP No. 14066; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; withdrawal memo; petition infructuous; bail granted by Supreme Court of India; Chief Superintendent Central Prison Parappanagrahara; Tumukur Town Police Station; Superintendent Police Tumukur; Director General and Inspector General of Police Karnataka; GM-POLICE; High Court of Karnataka; B M Shyam Prasad J.; disposed without merits; representation dated 24.02.2025; endorsement dated 15.03.2025.

What did the court decide?

None on the merits; petition withdrawn as infructuous and disposed of upon acceptance of the memo ¶33

Promad Y Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:2077 WP No. 37771 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 37771 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PROMAD Y S/O YADUKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1^ST CROSS, NEAR GANAPATI TEMPLE, VINOBANAGAR, TUMAKURU, PIN 572 101.

¶9

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER, YADUKUMAR S/O GURUSIDDAPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY, UNDER CTP NO. 14066.

¶11

&PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH K..,ADVOCATE)

¶13

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:2077 WP No. 37771 of 2025

¶14

HC-KAR

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA POLICE INSPECTOR, TUMUKUR TOWN POLICE STATION, TUMUKUR DISTRICT, PIN 572 021.

¶17

THE SUPERRINTENDENT POLICE, TUMUKUR DISTICT, TUMUKUR, PIN-572 021.

¶18

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KARNATAKA STATE, BANGALORE- 560 002.

¶19

THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PARAPPANAGRAHARA, BANGALORE- 560 100.

¶20

RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI.B. RAVINDRANATH., AGA)

¶22

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24.02.2025 AT ANNX-A IMMEDIATELY AND RELEASE THE FATHER OF THE PETITIONER ON EMERGENCY PAROLE AS PRAYED

¶23

¶24

NC: 2026:KHC:2077 WP No. 37771 of 2025

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

IN THE REPRESENTATION; QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R-4 DATED 15.03.2025 AT ANNX-D.

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed

¶31

a memo which reads as under:

¶32

"That the abovenamed petitioner respectfully submits that, the father of the petitioner was already enlarged on bail granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Therefore, the above writ petition became infructuous. Hence, this memo for withdrawal, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶33

The memo is accepted and the petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶35

¶36

Promad Y v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Promad Y v. the 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

Sri Narayanaswamy Naidu P G Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri H M Vasanthakumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Arun Kumar Vs the Manager

M/S Mysore Metal Industries Vs R.J.Rishikiran Projects Pvt. Ltd.

Jyothi Vs the State of Karnataka

Pradosh S Rao Vs the State of Karnataka