1 2025:CGHC:37856-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 441 of 2025 Lakhama S/o Bojja Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Kudum Khodara, Raut Para, Police Station Darbha, District Bastar C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Department of Home (Jail), Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2. The Jail and Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, The Director General Prisoner, Jail Road, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector/district Magistrate, Jagdalpur, Place Bastar C.G. 4. Jail Superintendent, Central Jail, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur C.G. 5. Superintendent of Police, Jagdalpur, Place Bastar C.G. ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Savita Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.08.01 19:21:05 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 01.08.2025 1. Heard Ms. Savita Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State. 2. 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 call for the entire records from respondents pertaining to petitioner for kind perusal of the Hon’ble Court. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the order/memo dated 15.01.2024 (Annexure P/1) and direct the respondents to release the petitioner on leave as applied by him in the application for 14+2 days leave. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur (C.G.) vide order dated 10.03.2017 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 3 Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Challenging the said order, the petitioner preferred criminal appeal bearing CRA No. 644 of 2017 before this Court, which was dismissed vide order dated 14.03.2024. 4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had filed an application for grant of temporary release (parole) before the Jail Superintendent, Jagdalpur, which was duly endorsed and forwarded to the District Magistrate, Bastar, Jagdalpur (C.G.). However, the same was summarily rejected by respondent No. 3 vide impugned order dated 15.01.2024, without adhering to the relevant provisions of Rules 4 and 6, as well as Rules 3, 9, 11, and 12 of the Chhattisgarh Prisoners' Leave Rules, 1989 (for short, 'the Rules of 1989'). Therefore, it is contended that the impugned order dated 15.01.2024 is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submits that the application for grant of parole was duly considered and rejected by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Bastar, Jagdalpur (C.G.) vide order dated 15.01.2024, which does not warrant any interference. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order as well as the material available on record. 7. A perusal of the impugned order dated 15.01.2024 reveals that the DIG (Prisons) and SSP, Bastar, obtained reports from the Sarpanch, sureties, and the victim's family. The Sarpanch, Shri Dewaram Markam, and the Up-Sarpanch, Shri Sukhram, have stated that the petitioner, 4 Lakha, committed murder using a tangia (axe) and poses a threat to the village.The sureties, Smt. Jibho Madkami, wife of Bandaru Madkami, resident of Kudumkhodra (Rautpara), District Bastar, and Shri Baman Madkami, son of Late Joga Madkami, resident of Kudumkhodra (Lohapara), have opined that the petitioner is hot-tempered and prone to violence, and that his release may result in another violent incident. The victim’s sister, Smt. Janaki, daughter of Late Hadma, has stated that the murder arose from a dispute over government relief funds and that release on parole may lead to further harm. Considering the above reports and in the interest of public safety, the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Bastar, Jagdalpur (C.G.), rejected the parole application. 8. In view of the foregoing, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order dated 15.01.2024 passed by the Collector-cum- District Magistrate, Bastar, Jagdalpur (C.G.) rejecting the petitioner’s application for parole. 9. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan