1 2025:CGHC:52629-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 557 of 2025 Gajendra Kumar Kurre S/o Gofelal Kurre Aged About 47 Years R/o Village And P.S. Chandnu, Tahsil- Bemetara, Distt. Bemetara C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director General Prisons, The Jail & Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Jail Road, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3 - Additional District Magistrate, Distt. Bemetara C.G. 4 - Jail Superintendent, Central Jail, Durg, District Durg C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.10.30 10:44:03 +0530 2 Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 29.10.2025 1. Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. S. Baghel, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents/State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following relief:- “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondents to consider the petitioner for release under Rule 358 of Chhattisgarh Prisons Rules 1968 r/w section 432 of Cr.P.C. in a time bound manner; (ii) Quash the opinion dated 20.08.2025 (Annexure P/1), whereby the pre-mature release of the petitioner has been denied. (iii) Direct to the respondent authorities to send the case of the petitioner before the State Review Board for pre-mature release to the petitioner. (iv) Pass any other order the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice..” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a convicted prisoner detained in Central Jail Durg (C.G.). The petitioner has served more than 15 years of his jail sentence. Vide judgment dated 24.01.2012, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bemetara, in Session Trial No. 21/2010 the petitioner was convicted under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. The Jail Superintendent, Central Jail Durg has recommended that the 3 petitioner is fit for premature release as his conduct in jail was good further the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bemetara has also recommended the petitioner to be released prematurely in light of remission earned by him. However, the respondent No.3, vide order dated 20/08/2025 rejected the application of the petitioner for premature release on the ground that there is ban/bar on premature release of the prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 in light of the provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 20.08.2025 passed by the respondent authorities are arbitrary, illegal and against the law and the same has been passed by the respondents just on the basis of the bar/ban given in Rule 358(3)(g) (two) of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 without considering his good conduct during his detention period. The petitioner has undergone actual jail sentence for the period of more than 15 years with earned remission, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to pre-mature release under section 473 of the BNSS 2023 (432 of the Cr.P.C.). Further, the provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 has been amended vide notification dated 23.04.2025 and at present there is no bar/ban on pre-mature release of the prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, and therefore, the petitioner is eligible to be considered for pre-mature release under 4 section 473 of BNSS 2023 (432 of the Cr.P.C.). Also, several prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 have been released under remission of the rest part of sentence but in so far as the case of the petitioner is concerned, the same has been rejected on the ground of the bar/ban given in Rule 358(3)(g) (two) of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 and it is nothing but a clear discrimination again the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is similar to the case of Soyam Rama Vs State of Chhattisgarh (W.P.(Cr.) No. 448/2024 decided on 25.11.2024) and the case of Basant Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh (W.P. (Cr.) No. 100/2025 decided on 21.03.2025). 5. Learned counsel for the respondents/ State could not dispute the said fact that the impugned order dated 20.08.2025 has been passed by the respondent authorities just on the basis of the bar/ban given in Rule 358(3)(g) (two) of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 and not on merits and further, the provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 has been amended vide notification dated 23.04.2025 and at present, there is no bar/ban on pre-mature release of the prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the IPC, and therefore, the petitioner is eligible to be considered for pre-mature release under section 473 of BNSS 2023 (432 of the Cr.P.C.). 6. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 20/08/2025 is hereby set aside. 5 Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the concerned authority/ State Sentence Review Board, Chhattisgarh. 7. The Director General (Prison), State of Chhattisgarh is directed to ensure that the prisoner with identical situation be provided all the proper assistance for making a requisite application for remission in pursuance of the amended provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule, 1968. 8. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit the copy of this order to the Director General (Prison), State of Chhattisgarh forthwith for necessary information and follow up action. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice $ Bhilwar