1 2025:CGHC:16839-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 192 of 2025 Govinda @ Sheikh Kaleem S/o Pratap @ Sheikh Kaleem Aged About 36 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As Chhotu Nihal), R/o Arvind Nagar, Panjabi Colony, Opposite To Sant Kanwar Ram School, P.S. - Civil Line, Raipur, Distt. - Raipur ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Department of Home (Jail), Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 492002 2. Director General Jail And Correctional Services, Jail Headquarter, Sector-19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. District Magistrate Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 4. Superintendent Central Jail Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Renu Kochar, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.04.15 11:16:06 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 11.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. Heard Ms. Renu Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents/State. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus thereby directing the respondents to release petitioner as he has completed 16 years of his jail sentence excluding the period of remission. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to pass order deciding the remission of the petitioner/convict in light of the provisions of law and dictum given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lakshman Naskar vs. Union of India and Ram Chander vs. Sate of Chhattisgarh & Another. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may be further pleased to pass any other consequential and other orders/writs 3 which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in facts and circumstances of the case.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present petition with a liberty to approach appropriate Forum for redressal of their grievance. 5. Learned State counsel has no objection. 6. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan