Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010255652025 2026:GAU-AS:6810 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6830/2025 MD. ROHIM ALI ALIAS ROHIMUDDIN AHMED ALIAS KARIM S/O- LATE NURUDDIN ALI, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- JANPAR, P.O.- GOLAGHAT, P.S.- GOLAGHAT, DISTRICT- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785621. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-07. 3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI. 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DISTRICT JAIL GOLAGHAT P.O. GOLAGHAT DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785621 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K M HALOI, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 18.05.2026 Heard Mr. K. M. Haloi, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms M. Barman, learned State counsel for all the respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order vide Memo No.PRI.53/2022/110-A dated 24.10.2024, issued by the Inspector General of Prison, Assam. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was convicted for offence under Section 302 of the IPC by the Judgment and Order dated 07.04.2001, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat in Sessions Case No.143/2000 and sentenced to under go imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of fine, another rigorous imprisonment for two years. The petitioner’s contention is that the petitioner has already spent 25 years in jail and he has already deposited the fine amount of Rs.10,000/- before the court of learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat and the same has already been accepted. He contended that he applied for remission of his sentence for early release from jail and the Superintendent of District Jail, Golaghat submitted the aforesaid proposal for remission of his sentence and for his early release from jail before the Inspector General of Prisons of Assam. It is also contended that the learned Session Judge, Golaghat had also consented for consideration of his remission petition. Additionally, the District Magistrate of Golaghat Page No.# 3/6 District, on the basis of the conduct report received from the Superintendent of Police, Golaghat, recommended for grant of remission of petitioner’s imprisonment and his early release. It is contended that there is no adverse remark against the petitioner in the aforesaid report, opinion and recommendation so submitted along with his petition for remission. However, his remission petition was rejected by the Inspector General of Prinsons/respondent No.3, vide his order dated 24.10.2024 with the comment that “Escape from jail for 5 years while on leave”. 4. Mr. Haloi, learned Legal Aid Counsel submits that while submitting petitioner’s remission petition, sent from the office of Superintendent of District Jail, Golaghat, no such adverse comments or remarks have been made. He referred to the document i.e. Additional Information of life convict AC/7611 MD Rohim Ali@Rohimuddin Ahmed@Karim. He specifically referred to serial No.2 and 7 wherein at serial No.2 against the question, “Whether the life convict had returned to jail exactly on the date of reporting back to the Jail, if not number of days of over stay”, the remark has been made as “Yes, returned to District Jail, Golaghat on exact date.” In serial No.7, in the column of recommendation of Superintendent, the following has been reflected, “The conduct, behaviour and performance of the Life convict AC/7611 Md Rohim Ali@Rohimuddin Ahmed @Karim is found Good and satisfactory during his confinement in his Jail. He is engaged in Jail Kitchen. Hence he is recommended for release from this Jail”. The learned Legal Aid Counsel further referred to a document annexed at page-51 as Annexure-9 of the writ petition, wherein the history of leave/Emergency release availed by the convict have been reflected. He submits that from the aforesaid report also, it is seen that Page No.# 4/6 whenever a leave had been granted to the petitioner, the petitioner had come back to the jail exactly on the same date. In view of the aforesaid documents and records, the learned Legal Aid Counsel submits that there are no adverse remarks and there is no record, in fact, of his delayed entry, after taking leave into the jail. The learned Legal Aid Counsel further submits that there is no record as such of his escape from jail for 5 years during leave and he submits that had there been some records of such a escape from the jail for 5 years, that could have definitely been noticed by the Superintendent of Jail, Golaghat. Being so, he submits that the instant case should be re-considered again taking into account his track records during his stay of 25 years in jail and his remission petition should be properly considered and disposed of. 5. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed in the instant case, wherein, the stand has been taken that a note of Superintendent of District Jail, Golaghat dated 17.11.2010 in the history ticket reflected that “Escaped from M.N.O.A Jail on 17.11.2010 after noon” and another dated 18.03.2016 reflected that “Re-admitted in this jail on 18.03.2016 after he was re-captured by Karbi Anglong police in connection with GR 1480/10 under Section 324 IPC”. 6. The learned Government counsel submits that in view of the aforesaid history ticket, the concerned Inspector General of Prisons, has rejected the remission petition of the petitioner. 7. This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and has also seen the materials brought on record. It is submitted by the learned Legal Aid Counsel that Page No.# 5/6 usually the remission petitions of the convicts are considered twice in a year as per OM dated 06.10.2015 issued by Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home Department. In the present year, one such meeting has already been carried out by the concerned respondent authorities in the month of January and another will be held in the coming months. 8. Taking into account the aforesaid and that there are some discrepancies in the reports submitted by the Superintendent of Jail, Golaghat, this Court is of the considered opinion that since the respondent authorities are going to consider the remission applications of eligible convicts some time in this year, for the ends of justice, the case of the petitioner can also be re-considered, taking into account all his track records during his stay of 25 years in the District Jail of Golaghat. Therefore, it is directed to the respondent authorities, specially to the Superintendent of District Jail, Golaghat to re-submit his remission petition along with all his track records, history tickets etc., before the concerned authority i.e. the Inspector General of Prisons, Assam. Thereafter, the same shall be considered as per law by the Inspector General of Prisons accordingly. 9. In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant writ petition is disposed of. 10. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents shall communicate this order to the Superintendent of District Jail, Golaghat, expeditiously. Page No.# 6/6 JUDGE Comparing Assistant