- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47387 WP No. 18206 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 18206 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: PRAKASH NAIK (BROTHER OF CONVICTED PRISONER NO 9761 RAJANAIK ALIS PAPANAIK) S/O LATE LOKYA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT BEKKINA KALMATA GRAMA, HOSUDI SHIVAMOGGA, KARNATAKA 577222 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAKSHITH R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE SECRETARY OF HOME DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001 2. CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CENTRAL PRISON, PARAPANA AGRAHARA BANGALORE 560100 REP BY AG …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SIDARTH BABU RAO, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF R2 DATED 06.12.2024 CPB/CTP-SEC/14018/2024 AT ANNEXURE-A AND RELEASE PETITIONERS BROTHER RAJANAIK @ PAPANAIK (CONVICT PRISONER NO. 9761) ON PAROLE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47387 WP No. 18206 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The brother of the detenu-Rajanaik @ Papanaik- CTP.No.9761 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; A. Issue a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of quash the order of R2 dated 06.12.2024 CPB/CTP- SEC/14018/2024 at Annexure-A and release petitioners brother Rajanaik @ Papanaik (convict prisoner no. 9761) on parole. B. Any other order that this Honble Court deems fit in the interests of justice, equity and good conscience. 2. The detenu had been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 302 of the IPC in S.C.No.130/2016 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga and sentenced on 11.09.2017 with the highest of the sentence being imprisonment for life. The detenu has served a period of 08 years 11 months 16 days of imprisonment as on 23.02.2025 and his conduct in jail is said to be satisfactory. No one else being available to repair the house, his mother filed an application for parole, which was rejected on the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47387 WP No. 18206 of 2025 ground that criminal appeal and bail applications were pending and, as such, the application for parole could not be considered. In that background, the petitioner is before this court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 3. This Court has dealt with the issue of refusal on account of pendency of the Criminal Appeal and Bail application in detail in the case of Arjun Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors in W.P.No.201808/2023 vide order dated 26.07.2023 has come to a categorical conclusion that mere pendency of an appeal and or a bail application would not be a ground to reject parole which is temporary in nature while a bail would apply during the time when the appeal is pending. 4. A perusal of the imprisonment certificate indicates that there is no particular complaint against the detenu, and his conduct has been satisfactory. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47387 WP No. 18206 of 2025 5. The only reason for rejection of the parole being the pendency of the criminal appeal and the bail application, which have been dealt with here and above, I am of the considered opinion that the detenu would be entitled to parole, having spent a period of 8 Years, 11 months, 16 days in incarceration. As such, I pass the following: ORDER i) The Writ Petition is allowed. ii) Respondent–Chief Superintendent, Central Prison, Parapana Agrahara, Bangalore, is directed to release detenu-Rajanaik @ Papanaik-CTP.No.9761 on parole for a period of 30 days commencing from 25.11.2025 or from the date of release, whichever is earlier, subject to the following conditions: a) The prisoner-Rajanaik @ Papanaik- CTP.No.9761 shall mark his attendance in the jurisdictional Police Station, weekly - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47387 WP No. 18206 of 2025 once throughout the period of his parole and it would be the responsibility of the jurisdictional Police to take them to gaol, in the event, the convict would evade going back to the gaol, after the expiry of the period of parole. b) Respondent No.1- State of Karnataka shall stipulate strict conditions as are usually stipulated to ensure return of the detenu to the gaol and that he shall not commit any other offence during the period of parole. iii) The Registry is directed to communicate the order to the prison authority for its immediate execution. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE KTY/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61