- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19974 WP No. 2774 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 2774 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SURENDRA POOJARI @ SOORU S/O. LATE BABU POOJARI, S/O.HUSSAIN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, (CTP NO.1441), R/AT SHANTHIGIRI, YARLAPADY VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 102 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M R.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS HOME SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110001. 2. THE UNDER SECRETARY (JUDICIAL WING), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, HALL NO.17, 2ND FLOOR, MAJOR DHYAN CHAND NATIONAL STADIUM, INDIA GATE, NEW DELHI 110 001 Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19974 WP No. 2774 of 2026 3. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PCAS), HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS BY SRI. MALLANAGOUDA H, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 AND 2 AUTHORITIES TO GIVE CONCURRENCE FOR THE RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER PURSUANT TO THE COMMUNICATION / LETTER BEARING NO. HD 63 PRA 2023 DATED 20.07.2023 AS PER ANNX-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, FRESH MATTERS LIST, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The Captioned petition is filed seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent Nos. 1 and 2/authorities to give concurrence on the recommendations made by respondent No.3/Government to release petitioner prematurely, alleging that despite third respondent having sent the recommendation, the second respondent has not passed appropriate orders. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19974 WP No. 2774 of 2026 2. On the previous date of hearing, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 placed on record a memo indicating that respondent No.3/State has not yet furnished the requisite documents. It is in this backdrop of non-furnishing of documents that respondent No.2 has expressed its inability to take a final decision on the recommendations forwarded by respondent No.3 in relation to the case of the detenue. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the memo filed by respondent No.1. A careful reading of the memo would reveal that respondent No.2 is insisting upon production of certain additional documents, namely: (i) family details of the detenue, (ii) medical status report, (iii) opinion of the Investigating Agency, and (iv) opinion of the Jail Authorities. This Court finds such insistence, at least in part, to be wholly unwarranted and legally unsustainable. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19974 WP No. 2774 of 2026 4. Once the charge sheet has been filed and the matter has culminated in conviction, the role of the Investigating Agency pales into insignificance, and its opinion ceases to have any determinative value in the context of premature release. Likewise, when the case of the detenue has already been examined by the Advisory Board and thereafter scrutinized by the competent Committee, culminating in a recommendation by respondent No.3/State, the insistence on obtaining the opinion of the Jail Authorities afresh appears to be superfluous and redundant. 5. Insofar as the other documents are concerned, the learned counsel for respondent No.3/State, on instructions, submits that all necessary documents, except the opinion of the Investigating Agency and the Jail Authorities, shall be furnished within a stipulated time. Recording the said submission and having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to issue necessary directions to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19974 WP No. 2774 of 2026 streamline the decision-making process and obviate further delay. 6. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) Respondent No.3/State shall furnish all relevant documents in its custody, as sought by respondent No.2, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, excluding the opinion of the Investigating Agency and the opinion of the Jail Authorities. (iii) Upon receipt of the said documents, respondent No.2 shall consider the recommendation for premature release and take a final decision, strictly in accordance with law, within an outer limit of six (6) weeks therefrom. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19974 WP No. 2774 of 2026 (iv) In the interregnum, and having regard to the delay occasioned on account of inter- departmental correspondence, the Chief Superintendent, Central Prison, Belagavi, is hereby directed to release the detenue on parole subject to the following conditions, and such parole shall continue until respondent No.2 takes a final decision as directed supra. (a) The detenue shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional prison authorities; (b) The detenue shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the District concerned without prior permission of the jurisdictional police; (c) The detenue shall mark his attendance once in a week, preferably on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional Police Station; (d) The detenue shall not, in any manner, indulge in any criminal activity or associate with persons having criminal antecedents; PAGE NO.6 IS RE-TYPED AND RE-PLACED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 30.04.2026. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19974 WP No. 2774 of 2026 (e) The detenue shall maintain peace and good behaviour during the period of parole; (f) The detenue shall furnish his residential address and mobile number to the jurisdictional police and shall keep the same active at all times; (g) On expiry of the parole period, the detenue shall surrender before the prison authorities without fail, unless the parole is extended in accordance with law; (h) In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the respondents are at liberty to recall the parole and take the detenue into custody forthwith, in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62