- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9748 WP No. 101954 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 101954 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: MANTESH HULIGAPPA VADDAR S/O. HULIGAPPA VADDAR, BROTHER OF CONVICT, SANTOSHA S/O. HULIGAPPA VADDARA @ DAPYA (CTP NO.5234), AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O. VADDAR STREET, NAVALAGUND DHARWAD, KARNATAKA-582208. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. UMME SALMA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HOME DEPARTMENT THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, DHARWAD-580008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R1 TO R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT(S), ORDER(S) OR DIRECTION(S) AND THEREBY: (A) DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER S BROTHER ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.08.07 12:01:36 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9748 WP No. 101954 of 2025 HEREIN CONVICT NAMED SANTHOSHA S/O HULIGAPPA VADDARA @ DAPYA (CTP NO.5234) ON GENERAL PAROLE FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. (B) PASS ANY OTHER ORDER(S) WHICH THIS COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND PROPER UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: “To issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction(s) and thereby: (a) Direct the Respondent No.2 to release the petitioner’s brother herein convict named Santhosha S/O Huligappa Vaddara @ Dapya (CTP No.5234) on general parole for a period of 90 days in the interest of justice. (b) Pass any other order(s) which this court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 2. The petitioner’s brother namely Santosha S/o Huligappa Vaddar @ Dapya having been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 302, 353, 332 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9748 WP No. 101954 of 2025 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) by learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad in S.C.No.60/2020 on 17.09.2024, for a period of life imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- insofar as the offence under Section 302 of IPC is concerned, six months for the offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC, two years for the offence punishable under 332 of IPC and three years for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC, with all sentences running concurrently. 3. The present petition has been filed on 18.03.2025, contending that the petitioner, Mantesh Vaddar, was to be married in the month of March 2025. Thereafter, a memo has been filed on 13.06.2025 stating that the marriage has been postponed and now proposed to be held on 29.06.2025. As regards which, a marriage invitation card has been produced. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9748 WP No. 101954 of 2025 4. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner’s brother having been in custody as under trial for 4-years, 8-months and 18- days, has undergone imprisonment for 5-years, 1- month, 19-days as on 18.02.2025 and as such, he is required to be released on parole. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate., for respondents-State on instruction as also by referring to Annexure-B, which has been produced along with the petition submitted that the petitioner’s brother is also involved in one more criminal proceeding in C.C.No.94/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 342, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC and it is for that reason that the petitioner, could not be enlarged on parole. He therefore submits that there being a restriction under the police manual, to do so, the endorsement which had been issued, is proper and correct. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9748 WP No. 101954 of 2025 6. Heard Smt. Umme Salma., learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for respondents – State. 7. Perused the papers. 8. Though initially it was disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no other case pending against the petitioner. A perusal of Annexure-B, would categorically indicate that the petitioner himself has produced the said endorsement indicating the pendency of the said proceedings. Insofar as the wedding is concerned, the same does not inspire any confidence inasmuch as the filing of the petition on 18.03.2025 to indicate that there is a wedding to be held in the end of March, 2025 and subsequently, stating that the marriage has been postponed due to the absence of the petitioner and later on to be held on 29.06.2025 and now once again stating that the marriage is been postponed and has not been held. As such, until the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9748 WP No. 101954 of 2025 petitioner’s brother is released on parole, the marriage cannot be performed. 9. Be that as it may, for one other reason, I am not inclined to grant parole to the petitioner, inasmuch as the conviction order was passed on 17.09.2024 and within a period of six months thereafter, the present petition for parole has been filed, which cannot be accepted when the sentence which has been imposed, is for life imprisonment. Granting parole in these kinds of matters, would impinge upon the public confidence in the adjudicatory process. 10. As such, no grounds being made out, the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE AM/- CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20