2025:UHC:8154-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1008 of 2025 12th September, 2025 Raees @ Satna ---Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & Ors. ---Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Ms. Divya Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State -------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT : (per Sri G. Narendar, C.J.) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. 2. Learned Deputy Advocate General would submit that the instant petition is preferred on the premise that their representation for being released on parole has not been considered by the Competent Authority and in that view they have once again sought for release of the petitioner on a short term bail. 3. Learned Deputy Advocate General would 1 2025:UHC:8154-DB submit that the representation has been considered by the Competent Authority and disposed of on 05.06.2025 but it is fairly conceded that the same has not been communicated to the petitioner and he would submit that the petitioner may be directed to approach the State Appellate Authority. 4. The submission of the learned Deputy A.G. is placed on record. 5. The right to be released on parole or furlough is not an empty right but a right that is granted to the prisoners pursuant to judgment of conviction and with the larger objective of permitting the convicts to remain integrated with the civil society. In that view, the non- communication of the rejection of the application for parole cannot be appreciated. We hope the Competent Authority would ensure that such lapses are not repeated in future. 6. Be that as it may. In the event, the petitioner files any appeal before the State Appellate Authority, we deem it appropriate to issue a mandamus in the nature of a direction directing the State Appellate Authority to consider the appeal as expeditiously as possible at any 2 2025:UHC:8154-DB rate within an outer limit of four weeks from the date of presentation of the appeal. 7. Writ petition stands ordered, accordingly. 8. There shall be no order as to costs. 9. All pending applications stand disposed of. (G. NARENDAR, C. J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 12.09.2025 Rajni 3