- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.109758 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: DARSHAN S K S/O. KUMAR SON OF CONVICT KUMAR S/O. RAMAYYA (CTP NO.-4168) AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SANTHEKEREHALLI, KERESANTHE, TQ. KADUR, DIST. CHIKMAGALURU, KARNATAKA-577548. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. I.Y. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, HOME DEPARTMENT, THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL DEPARTMENT, NO.4, SHESHADRI ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560009. 3. THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, P.B. ROAD, Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 DHARWAD-580008. 4. THE POLICE SUPERINTENDENT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, DIST. CHIKKAMAGALURU-562101. 5. POLICE INSPECTOR, KADUR POLICE STATION, KADUR-577548, DIST. CHIKKAMAGALURU. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 BEARING NO.r¹Dgï©/¹¹/¥ÉgÉÆî/21/2025 DATED 06.12.2025 I.E. VIDE ANNEXURE-“D” AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER’S FATHER, CONVICT NAMELY KUMAR S/O RAMAYYA (CTP NO.4168) ON GENERAL PAROLE FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC.,. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “PRAYER Wherefore it is humbly prayed before this that this Hon’ble Court that, be pleased to. A. Issue a writ in nature of certiorari and quash the report submitted by the Respondent No.4 bearing no.r¹Dgï©/¹¹/¥ÉgÉÆî/21/2025 dated 06.12.2025 i.e. Vide Annexure-“D”. B. And Direct the Respondent No.3 to release the Petitioner’s father, convict namely Kumar S/o Ramayya (CTP No.-4168) on General parole for a period of 90 days in the interest of Justice. C. Grant such other relief/s that this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. The petitioner is the son of the convict who is lodged in Central Prison Dharwad and undergoing the life imprisonment for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. It is stated that the petitioner's father has already undergone the actual period of 11 years 03 months 23 days as on 10.12.2025. It is stated that the residential house of the convict is collapsed during the rainy season. To reconstruct the said house, presence of the convict is necessary. Hence, he made the request for grant of general parole for a period of 30 days. The father of the petitioner has - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 made a representation on 23.11.2025 to respondent No.3 for grant of general parole for the purpose of construction of the residential house. The respondent No.3 sought a report from respondent No.4 and the respondent No.4 submitted the report to respondent No.3 on 06.12.2025. It is stated that the petitioner is presenting this petition having left with no other alternative and efficacious remedy. It is stated that the respondent No.4 has submitted the report dated 06.12.2025 without considering the reasons assigned in the application and the convict is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.4 has given a report and formally that would be the report and no other order would be passed by the respondent No.3. As such, there shall be a direction to the respondents to release the petitioner on parole. He had relied on some of the orders passed by the Co-ordinate benches of this Court where the parole is granted basing on such reliefs sought by the petitioner. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 4. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. Rule 191 of the Karnataka Prisons Rules, 1974 deals with release under Section 56 and as per the same, the Inspector General of Prison may release any prisoner on ordinary parole under this rule initially for a period not exceeding 30 days which may be extended for such period not exceeding 30 days at a time, as Inspector General deems fit. Further, a prisoner who desires to be released on ordinary parole shall submit an application to the Superintendent who shall forward the same along with his remarks to the Inspector General along with nominal roll of the prisoner and such other information as may be required. The Superintendent shall ascertain from the Executive Magistrate of the concerned Taluk and the Police concerned particulars of the sureties before accepting them and the genuineness or otherwise of the purpose for which the prisoner has applied for grant of parole. The Executive Magistrate and the Police concerned shall within 15 days after the receipt of such reference, forward their report to the Superintendent failing which it is presumed that they have nothing adverse to report. If no adverse report is received within such time, it shall be presumed that the concerned Police and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 the Taluk Executive Magistrate have nothing adverse to report against the prisoner regarding the request made by the prisoner. The Superintendent shall thereafter make his recommendation to the Inspector General of Prisons, who shall examine and pass suitable orders for release of prisoner on parole subject to the conditions. 5. It is the respondent No.2 who has to pass the order granting/rejecting parole. Once an order is passed by the respondent No.2, then the cause of action will accrue to the petitioner to approach this Court assailing the order passed by respondent No.2. In this case, respondent No.3 has sought for a report from respondent No.4 and the report submitted by respondent No.4 is assailed before this Court. In the considered opinion of this Court, this Court cannot pass any orders considering the report of respondent No.4, when the authority who has to consider the case of the petitioner for sanctioning of parole is respondent No.2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in majority of the cases, respondent No.2 is not passing any orders and they will give only a copy of the report of respondent No.4 whenever they are not granting parole - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 to the prisoner. The respondents cannot act contrary to the procedure contemplated under the Karnataka Prisons Rules, 1974. Even as per the rules, 15 days time limit is fixed for the report to be sent from the Magistrate and the Station House Officer. If the report is not received, then respondent No.3 has to forward the same to the respondent No.2 and it will be presumed that there are no adverse reports. This Court is not able to understand why this procedure is not followed by the respondents and why the High Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India shall discharge the duties of respondent No.2. In the considered opinion of this Court, such writ petitions are not maintainable before this Court. Hence, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Whenever an application is filed by the convict, the respondents shall strictly follow the procedure contemplated under Section 191 of the Karnataka Prisons Rules, 1974 and an order shall be passed by the Director General of Prisons/Inspector General of Prisons in accordance with the rules. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:625 WP No. 109758 of 2025 ii. The Director General of Prisons/Inspector General of Prisons shall pass an order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. iii. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order that is passed by the concerned, he is at liberty to approach this Court. iv. The Additional Registrar General is directed to communicate the copy of this order to respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 shall ensure that there is strict compliance with Section 191 of the Karnataka Prisons Rules, 1974. v. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. vi. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MEG CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60