- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11541 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: MAHESHA S/O. LATE SUBBANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT MOTTADAKERI ROAD, YELANDURU TOWN. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALASUBRAMANYA B N.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY CHIEF SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE D. G. AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISON CENTRAL PRISON, MYSORE-570 007. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, MYSORE-570 007. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (CCRB) MYSORE-570 007. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CRIMINAL DIVISION-2, MYSORE-570 007. 6. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY YELANDUR POLICE STATION, CHAMARAJANAGARA, BENGALURU, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.BHANU PRAKASH., AAG A/W SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 6.09.2024 PASSED BY THE NO.YPS/PAROLE/02/2024 AND NO.CMP/ J3/ 3995/ 2024-25 RESPECTIVELY BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 AND 4 PRODUCED AT ANX-B AS ILLEGAL; DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON PAROLE FOR A TEMPORARY PERIOD OF 90 DAYS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is sentenced to imprisonment by the Judgment dated 30.12.2022 in Special Case No.349/2019 on the file of the Additional District Judge and FTSC-1, Chamarajanagar [also the Special Court for Trial of Cases filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [POCSO Act]. The petitioner's appeal in Crl.A.No.1923/2023 as against this conviction and sentence is pending consideration. The petitioner has approached the authorities for parole, but that has only resulted in a Communication dated 06.09.2024 addressed by the Superintendent of Police to the Deputy Commissioner of Chamarajanagar District that if the petitioner is admitted to parole, there could be a law and order situation. 2. This Court has heard Mr. Balasubramanya B.N., the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Bhanu Prakash, the learned Additional Advocate - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 General, who is assisted by Ms .K.P. Yashodha, the learned Additional Government Advocate, on whether this Court must intervene in the present petition and admit the petitioner to parole or relegate the petitioner to apply with the authorities as contemplated under the Karnataka Prisons and Correctional Services Manual 2021 [for short, 'the Manual 2021']. 3. This Court must observe that the Manual 2021 prescribes a detailed procedure to be followed if a convict is to be admitted to either general or emergency parole. A convict must apply in the prescribed form in Form No.IX or Form No.XI of the Manual 2021 depending upon the request that he would make, and based on that, the Superintendent of Jail will have to call for a report and forward the report to the Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services for due decision. The petitioner has not furnished the details of the application, and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 this Court, given the circumstances including the date of the report, is of the view that the petitioner must make an application, which must be considered in terms of the Manual 2021. 4. The incidental question that is presented for this Court's consideration is: whether the Superintendent of a Jail could have considered the petitioner’s application. The Manual 2021 stipulates that the Superintendent of a Jail, after calling for a report from the concerned police, must place the report with the Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services for decision. In fact, the Manual 2021 stipulates that whether the report is in favour of admitting parole or against admitting parole, or even if no report is received within 15 days, the documents must be forwarded to the Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services for a decision. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 5. However, the afore question is because the State Government has notified amendment1 to Rule 191 [3][a]2 of the Karnataka Prison Rules, 1974 [for short, 'the Rules'], and in terms of this amendment, a proviso is introduced to Rule 191 [3][a] of the Rules. The proviso introduced reads as under: Provided that during the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases, COVID-19, Regulations, 2020 in respect of Prisoners released or to be released on ordinary parole or on the emergency parole the Superintendent may release for 30 days at a time but not exceeding 90 days in total or till the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases, COVID-19, 1 The Notification dated 15.04.2020 in No. HD 56 PRA 2020. 2 A prisoner may be released on emergency parole for such period not exceeding fifteen days, at a time as the authority releasing him deems fit for attending the last rites in case of death or in the event of terminal illness of father, mother, spouse, son, daughter, own brother and own sister of such prisoner or for attending the marriage of own son or own daughter or own brother or own sister. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 Regulations, 2020 is in force whichever is earlier. 6. Sri Bhanu Prakash submits that because the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases COVID -19 Regulations, 2020 continues to be in force without being repealed, whenever an application is filed for parole [either emergency or general] the Superintendent of the Jail considers the merits of the application. The learned Additional Advocate General invites this Court's attention to the Communication addressed by the Director General Prisons and Correctional Services to the Principal Secretary, Prisons Offences and Assistance Services, Home Department for clarification on the continuance of the amendment to Rule 191[3][a] of the Rules, and submits that there is no response. The learned Additional Advocate General also submits that this Court must therefore consider the efficacy of the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 decision taken by the Chief Superintendent of Jail in the light of these circumstances. 7. The Karnataka Epidemic Diseases COVID- 19 Regulations, 2020 itself is for a limited period, and this is seen from Regulation 16 which reads as under: These regulations shall come into force immediately and shall remain valid for a period of one year from the date of publication of this Notification The State Government has also notified the Karnataka Epidemic (Covid-19) Regulations, 2020 for the different districts in the State on 21.03.2020 for screening with certain stipulations. These regulations are also limited to a period of one year. This Court’s attention is not drawn to any notification issued extending the period of one year contemplated under the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases, COVID-19 Regulations, 2020. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 8. This Court must opine that the proviso to Rule 191 [3][a] of the Rules was intended as an exigent measure to be in force for a limited period because of the difficulties wrought by Covid-19 and with those difficulties having abated with the situation easing, this Court does not find any reason for continuance of an exigent arrangement stifling the procedure that is contemplated under the Manual 2021, especially when the regulations have ceased to operate. Further, with the procedure under the Manual 2021 not being followed but the decision being taken based on an exigent procedure, this Court is called upon to address multiple applications calling for reports from the concerned police when the decision could be taken in terms of the Manual 2021 without offence to the provisions of the Act and the Rules on parole in terms of the Manual 2021. 9. This Court is of the opinion that the requirement of a report from the concerned to be - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32181 WP No. 11541 of 2025 placed before the Senior Officer [the Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services] brings in an efficacious mechanism avoiding multiple petitions before this Court. Hence, the adjunct question presented for consideration is answered holding that from now on, unless a specific notification is issued by the Government, every application for parole whether emergency or general, shall be considered under the procedure contemplated under the Manual 2021 with liberty to the concerned to approach this Court only if there is cause for the same after such procedure is complied with. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr