1 2025:CGHC:52901-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 561 of 2025 Anand Chaudhary @ Guddu S/o Late Shri Makhan Lal Chaudhary Aged About 51 Years Caste - Bengali, R/o Kacharpada, Police Station - Kacharpada, District - Choubis Pargana (West Bengal), Present Address - Purani Bhilai, Near Bus Stand, Police Station - Purani Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Home (Jail) Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director General Of Prisons And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh Head Quarter - Prisons And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Jail Superintendent Central Jail Bilaspur (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.10.30 17:45:28 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 30.10.2025 1. Heard Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to this case from possession of the respondents for it’s kind perusal; 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction and quash/set- aside the memo dated 23.01.2025 (Annexure P/1) issued by the learned 2nd Additional Session Judge, Durg, District Durg (C.G.); 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to put/present the case of the petitioner for remission of rest part of sentence (in other words for pre mature release) under Section 473 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 before the learned 2nd Additional Session Judge, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) for fresh consideration and for giving fresh opinion under Section 473(2) of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023/432(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and the learned sentencing Court 3 may kindly be directed to provide opinion accompanied with adequate reasoning after taking into consideration the relevant factors as laid down in Laxman Naskar vs. Union of India reported in (2000) 2 SCC 595; 10.4 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to consider and decide the application (Annexure P/5) preferred by the petitioner for remission of rest part of sentence as early as possible preferably within a period of 30 days or within any other suitable period; and 10.5 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was convicted vide judgment dated 19.03.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in Session Trial No. 463 of 1993, under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The petitioner was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/–, with default stipulation. It is further submitted that being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal being CRA No. 1363 of 1999, which was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 10.09.2014. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on 08.01.2025, the petitioner submitted an application for remission of the remaining part of his sentence under Section 432 of the Cr.P.C. through the Superintendent of Jail. Thereafter, on 08.01.2025, the respondent 4 No. 3 issued a letter requesting the learned 2nd Additional Session Judge, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) to furnish an opinion under Section 432(2) of the Cr.P.C. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in response thereto, the learned 2nd Additional Session Judge, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) issued a memo dated 23.01.2025, giving a negative opinion under Section 473(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 / Section 432(2) of the Cr.P.C., observing that the petitioner has committed one more crime showing his name to be Ravi Swayi, S/o Rashanand Swayi while being on bail and furthermore his conduct appears to be not good inside jail. Learned counsel submits that the said negative opinion has resulted in inaction on the part of the competent authority, and despite lapse of more than 09 months, the petitioner’s application for remission (Annexure P/5) filed on 08.01.2025 remains undecided. He further submits that the petitioner is entitled to consideration of his case for remission under Section 473 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 / Section 432 of the Cr.P.C., and that a fair decision cannot be taken without obtaining a proper and reasoned opinion from the sentencing court. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jaswant Singh & Others vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Another, reported in (2023) 17 SCC 297, wherein it has been held that in case of an adverse opinion of the trial Court, the competent authority may obtain a fresh opinion before deciding the issue of remission. 5 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the petition is not maintainable, as the petitioner is essentially challenging the opinion of the competent authority. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. 8. In view of the submissions and considering the facts of the case, the competent authority is directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s application for remission, stated to have been made through the Superintendent of Jail on 08.01.2025, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if not already decided. 9. It is further observed that, in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jaswant Singh (supra), the competent authority, if it so deems appropriate, may obtain a fresh opinion from the concerned trial Judge before passing a reasoned and speaking order on the said application. 10. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed off with the aforesaid directions. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan