1 / 4 2025:CGHC:40367-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 459 of 2025 Sanju Sahu S/o Prabhulal Sahu Aged About 40 Years Occupation Building Material Work, R/o Shiv Chowk, Dundera, P.S. Utai, District Durg Chhattisgarh Through His Friend Golu Diwan, S/o Arati Diwan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Tikrapara, Khatik Mohalla, P.S. Civil Line District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Home (Jail) Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 The Jail Superintendent Central Jail Durg District- Durg (C.G.) 3 The District Magistrate Durg District- Durg (C.G.) 4 The Superintendent Of Police Durg District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G. JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.08.13 10:36:25 +0530 2 / 4 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, (Chief Justice) 12.08.2025 1) Heard Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate along with Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Dy. A.G. for the State. 2) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: 10.1 To call for entire records from respondents pertaining to petitioner's leave case for kind perusal of the Hon'ble High Court. 10.2 To quash impugned memo dated 24.06.2025 (Annexure P-1) and also to direct respondents to release petitioner on parole under the Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules 1989. 10.3 To grant any other relief deemed fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been convicted under Section 307 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act by the Trial Court. He further submits that against the conviction, the petitioner has preferred CRA No. 786 of 2024, wherein the co-ordinate bench of this court has reduced the sentence awarded to the petitioner from 5 years to 4 years. He 3 / 4 further submits that the petitioner is in jail since 25.09.2022 and has served more than 2 years of sentence and has filed application for grant of leave (parole) which has been rejected by the concerned authority by the impugned order dated 24.06.2025. He would further submit that the application of the petitioner has been rejected by the office of respondent No. 3 summarily without following the relevant provisions of the Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules 1989 (in brevity 'the Rule, 1989') and the respondents have acted arbitrarily violating Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, therefore, the order passed by the District Magistrate dated 24.06.2025 is liable to be set aside and the petition deserves to be allowed. 4) 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 Collector- cum-District Magistrate, Durg (C.G.) vide order dated 24.06.2025 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. 5) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and the material available on record. 6) Perusal of the impugned order goes to show that Superintendent of Police, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) has expressed his opinion that there is a possibility of happening of some untoward incident, 4 / 4 in case of release of prisoner Sanju Sahu on ordinary leave as the victim’s family had expressed said apprehension on the release of the petitioner on leave. Therefore, Collector-cum-District Magistrate, agreeing with the report received, in public interest, has rejected the leave application of petitioner. 7) Further, this Court has also noticed the fact that the prisoners are not surrendering after they are being released on parole. In this respect, report was also called from the Superintendent of Police who has affirmed the apprehension of the detaining authority. 8) During the course of argument, learned counsel appearing for the State by referring the affidavit filed by the Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh in WPPIL No. 33/2025 would submit that out of 30 prisoners released on parole since 18/03/2025 only 04 prisoners have surrendered as on 30/04/2025 and remaining 26 prisoners have been absconded and it is very difficult to arrest them. 9) In view of the above, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order impugned dated 24.06.2025 passed by District Magistrate, Durg (C.G.) rejecting the application for grant of leave (parole). 10) Accordingly, the instant petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti/ Shoaib