1 2026:CGHC:22191-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 267 of 2026 1 - Vimal @ Bittu Sahu S/o Late Bisahu Ram Sahu, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village and Police Station Parpodi, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Superintendent of Jail, Central Jail, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector, Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 4 - The Senior Superintendent of Police, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 5 - The Station House Officer, Police Station Parpodi, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pande, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN Date: 2026.05.19 11:15:02 +0530 2 12-05-2026 1. Heard Mr. Siddharth Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pande, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief(s):- “i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 21.01.2026 & 07.01.2026 (Annexure P/1) passed by the office of respondent no.3 and direct the respondent no.3 to release the petitioner on leave as applied by him for a period of 14+2 days. ii. Any other relief which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is convicted in Special Sessions Trial No. 16/2021 by the learned Special Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai, for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376(2)(j)(n), 376(3), 506-1, 509 of IPC, Sections 3/4, 5(l)/6 & 13/14 of POCSO Act, and Section 67 of the IT Act, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years. Challenging his conviction and sentence the petitioner has preferred an appeal before this Hon’ble Court (CRA No.1739/2024), which is pending for hearing on suspension of sentence, grant of bail, and final adjudication. The petitioner has remained in custody from 01.04.2021 to 02.08.2021 and from 3 12.09.2024 till date, totaling over 1 year, 11 months, and 20 days approximately, without ever being granted parole. Learned counsel further submits that earlier the petitioner filed an application for leave on parole under the Chhattisgarh Prisoner’s Leave Rules, 1989, and statements of relevant persons, including family members and the victim, were recorded, but the application was rejected summarily on the basis of objections raised by the family of the victim, without considering the mandatory provisions of the Rules. It is further submitted that the District Magistrate and competent authorities have failed to exercise discretion as required under Rule 6(a) of the Chhattisgarh Prisoner’s Leave Rules, 1989, which allows refusal of parole only if the release of the prisoner is fraught with danger to public safety. No specific finding was recorded by the authorities regarding the public interest or risk, and the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police was accepted mechanically, thereby frustrating the very object of the Rules. Learned counsel emphasizes that the petitioner is willing to furnish surety and comply with all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Reliance is placed on the order dated 12.11.2024 of this Court in WPCR No. 434/2024 and judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India, (2000) 3 SCC 409, which recognize parole as an administrative relief, distinct from bail, and requiring reasonable and fair exercise of discretion. Learned counsel prays that this Hon’ble Court may allow the petitioner’s parole application in the interest of justice. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the 4 prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner’s application for grant of leave (parole) has been rejected by respondent No.3 vide order dated 21.01.2026 on the recommendation of respondent No.4 dated 07.01.2026 and the concerned SHO. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and the documents annexed. 6. From perusal of the order impugned, it transpires that there was an objection raised by the family members of the victim that if the petitioner would be released on parole, he may be again involved in any untoward incident with the family members of the victim and there is every possibility of breach of peace in the village which is detrimental to the public interest. 7. Apart from the consideration of the District Magistrate, Bemetara, we noticed the issue involved in WPPIL No. 33/2025 (In the matter of Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others ), which is pending before this Court. In the said WPPIL No. 33/2025, on being direction made by this Court, the Director General of Police, PHQ, Chhattisgarh, filed his affidavit informing the fact about number of absconding accused persons who have been released on bail. It is necessary to reproduce the relevant part of the affidavit of the Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, which has been observed in the order dated 08.12.2025 in the WPPIL No. 33/2025, which reads as under:- 5 "4. That, the deponent most humbly and respectfully submits that in order to comply with the order of the Hon'ble Court, the deponent has immediately acted upon the letter of the office of the Advocate General dated 17/10/2025 and in continuation of the same, on 22/10/2025 necessary instructions and directions have immediately been issued to all the Range Inspector General of Polices including the Rail to ensure arrest and entry of40 prisoners who are still absconding, into the jail by carrying out a special drive in this regard and submit a report about the efforts made for arrest of the accused persons by the concerned Police by 02/12/2025 by enclosing the list of 40 absconding prisoners, who were released on parole, but, have not surrendered and are still absconding so that the order of the Hon'ble Court can be complied with by submitting the information in this regard. To demonstrate this fact, copy of the letter dated 22/10/2025 is filed herewith as Annexure A/3. 5. on That, the deponent most humbly and respectfully submits that taking cognizance of poor performance / efforts / progress in arresting the absconding prisoners, 29/10/2025 a DO letter dated 29/10/2025 has personally been written to all the Range Inspector General of Polices, Chhattisgarh to carry out a special drive for arresting the remaining absconded accused and further 6 ensure their entry into the jail after their arrest by preparing a working plan in this regard under the supervision of concerned District Superintendent of Polices. To demonstrate this fact, copies of the DO letters dated 29/10/2025 are filed herewith as Annexure A/4 colly. 6. That, the deponent most humbly and respectfully submits that as per the information received from 5 Circle Jails of the State, as on 02/12/2025, 2 absconded prisoners of Circle Jail Ambikapur and Circle Jail Jagdalpur have been arrested out of total40 prisoners and remaining is 38 in number. To demonstrate this fact, copy of the chart showing arrest of 2 absconded prisoners out of 40 prisoners is being filed herewith as Annexure A/5. 7. That, the deponent respectfully submits that the Police Personnel have made their all sincere and best efforts to arrest the aforesaid 40 absconded prisoners / accused and as a result of which the Police has succeeded in arresting 2 absconded prisoners. It is respectfully submitted that to arrest the remaining 38 absconding prisoners, the continuous efforts are being made by the concerned Police Officials and as soon as the said accused persons are arrested, they would be produced before the concerned learned Trial Court from where 7 they will be sent to the Jail. That, the deponent most respectfully submits that he has the highest regard and respect for the lawful authority of this Hon'ble Court as well as its orders and directions issued from time to time and is duty bound to adhere to and abide by the orders.” 8. This Court also noticed the increasing number of absconding accused persons who have been either released on parole or bail that once they have been released on bail/parol, they are not surrendering after completion of their period of parole. 9. Therefore, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the aforesaid consideration, we are not inclined to release the petitioner on parole. Further, perusal of the impugned order dated 21.01.2026 goes to show that the respondent No.4, Senior Superintendent of Police, District Bemetara has expressed opinion that in view of the memo sent by concerned police station in-charge wherein it has been reported that objection was raised on releasing the petitioner on parole/leave by the family members of the victim, no recommendation is made for temporary leave (parole) in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the respondent No.3, agreeing with the report has rejected the leave application of the petitioner. 10. Considering the nature of offence for which the petitioner has been been convicted and is undergoing jail sentence, further considering that the appeal against his conviction and sentence is pending and respondent No. 3, Collector/District Magistrate, Bemetara has rejected the application of the petitioner for leave (parole) on the 8 recommendation made by respondent No.4, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order impugned dated 21.01.2026 passed by respondent No.3 rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of leave (parole). 11. Accordingly, the instant petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner is granted liberty to move appropriate application in the criminal appeal which has been filed by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence for early hearing of his application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail which is pending in CRA No.1739/2024 and he may take steps for the same after summer vacation. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Aadil