1 2025:CGHC:23320-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 310 of 2025 1 - Dileep Sahu S/o. Jhumuklal Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o. Village - Dhobni, Post - Dhobni, Police Station - Sarshiwa, Dist. Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.), Through His Father- Jhumuklal Sahu, S/o. Motiram Sahu, Aged About 68 Years, R/o. Village - Dhobni, Post - Dhobni, Police Station - Sarshiwa, Dist. Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Home (Jail), Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Jail Superintendent Central Jail Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - The District Magistrate Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Dist. Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) 4 - The Superintendent of Police Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Dist. Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Goswami, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 12.06.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 To call for the entire records from respondents pertaining to petitioner's leave case for kind perusal of the Hon’ble Court. 10.2 To quash the order/memo dated 03.04.2025 (Annexure P/1) and direct the respondents to release the petitioner on parole under the C.G. Prisoner’s Leave Rules, 1989. 10.3 To grant any other relief deemed fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC(POCSO) (C.G.), under Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code (BNS) and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. Therefore, the petitioner has filed an application for grant of leave to the Jail Superintendent, Sarangarh- Bilaigarh which was forwarded to the District Magistrate, Sarangarh- Bilaigarh but the same has been rejected by the respondent No. 3 vide impugned order dated 03.04.2025 summarily without following the relevant provisions of Rules 4 & 6 of the Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave 3 Rules 1989 (for short, ‘Rules of 1989’) as well as Rules 6, 3, 9, 11 & 12 of the Rules of 1989, therefore, the order passed by the respondent No. 3 dated 03.04.2025 is liable to be set aside and the petition deserves to be allowed. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner's application for grant of leave (parole) has been rejected by the respondent No.3/District Magistrate, Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) vide order dated 03.04.2025 on the recommendation of the concerned Superintendent of Police holding that victim’s family had expressed their apprehension that the petitioner could cause harm to the life of victim on being releasing on leave. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and the material available on record. 5. Perusal of the impugned order goes to show that Superintendent of Police, Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) has expressed in his opinion that there is a possibility of some untoward incident happening due to prisoner Dileep Sahu coming on ordinary leave as the victim’s family had expressed their apprehension on being releasing the petitioner on leave. Further, the petitioner had not arranged any sureties. Therefore, The District Magistrate, agreeing with the report received, in public interest, has rejected the leave application of petitioner. 6. In view of the above, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order impugned dated 03.04.2025 passed by District Magistrate,Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 4 rejecting the application for grant of leave (parole). 7. Accordingly, the instant petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to law, if any, further cause of action arise. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Rahul/Amardeep