2026:CGHC:4571-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 52 of 2026 Bhushan S/o Shri Chhedilal Patel Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Kota Dabari, Police Station - Champa, District - Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home (Jail) Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director General Of Prisons And Correction Services Chhattisgarh Head Quarter - Prisons And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Jail Superintendent Central Jail Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Nitansh Jaiswal, PL --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board Per R amesh Sinha, Chief Justice 28.01.2026 Heard Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri Nitansh Jaiswal, learned PL, appearing for the respondent/State. 1. Petitioner has filed the present petition for the following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to this case from possession of the respondents for its kind perusal. Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2026.01.31 10:54:34 +0530 Wpcr 52 of 2026 2 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to consider and decide the case/prayer of the petitioner for remission of rest part of sentence under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973/473 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 as early as possible preferably within a period of 30 days or within any other suitable period; and 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that prayer of the petitioner for remission has been rejected by the competent authority on 26.03.2025 (Annexure P7) in view of the provisions given in Rule 358(3)(g)(2) of the Chhattisgarh Prison Rules, 1968 (hereafter, ‘the CG Prison Rules’), that the offence in question is punishable under Section 302/149, and therefore, petitioner is not entitled for remission. He would further submit that as the conviction of the petitioner was challenged before this court in CRA- 39 of 2010, in which this Court partly allowed the appeal and modified the judgment of conviction (Annexure P16) passed by the learned trial court from Section 302/149 to Section 302/34 of the IPC. Hence, the provision given in Rule 358(3)(g)(2) of the CG Prison Rules is not applicable in the case for rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for his remission, and the authority has wrongly rejected the application. The matter was again remitted back to the competent authority on 18.04.2025 (Annexure P8) giving reference of the letter dated 03.11.2024 Wpcr 52 of 2026 3 (Annexure P6) but the same was not decided till date. Thereafter, petitioner made another application for remission, disclosing the said fact, which is also pending consideration. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State supported the impugned order. 4. From perusal of documents annexed with the present petition, it transpires that petitioner was convicted by the learned trail Court for the offence punishable under Section 148, 302/149 by its judgment dated 16.12.2025 passed in ST-170 of 2009, and in the CRA-39 of 2010 filed by the petitioner before this Court, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has modified the conviction of appellant by the judgment dated 19.02.2015, and the petitioner herein was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of 34 instead of 302/149 of the IPC. It also transpires from the order dated 26.03.2025 passed by respondent-1/State that petitioner is undergoing his sentence for the offence under Section 302/149 of the IPC. The cases under which prisoner is convicted for the offence under Section 302/149 of the IPC, their cases would not be considered for remission as provided in Rule 358(3)(g)(2) of the CG Prison Rules, and on that ground, claim of the petitioner for remission was rejected. 5. True, it is, that Rule 358(3)(g)(2) of the CG Prison Rules has provided that the cases under which any prisoner has been convicted for the offence under Section 302/149 put up for consideration for remission, and further that, there is notification issued by the State Government on Wpcr 52 of 2026 4 23.04.2025 but in the present case, petitioner’s conviction has been altered for the offence to 302/34 of the IPC, and therefore, there would be no bar for consideration of the application of the petitioner for remission, as his conviction is under Section 302/34 IPC. 6. Considering the conviction of the appellant is altered to Section 302/34 IPC, his case for remission was again forwarded by respondent-3 to respondent-2 on 18.04.2025 (Annexure P8), and reminder letter was also been forwarded by respondent-3 to respondent-2 on 30.06.2025 for consideration of the claim of remission to the petitioner. As per the pleadings of the petitioner, in the month of August 2025, petitioner again made his application for grant of remission, and the same was recommended by the Jail authorities on 26.08.2025, and forwarded to the District Magistrate, Janjgir-Champa but till date, his application has not been considered by the authorities concerned, and the same has not been decided. 7. In view of above, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondent authorities to decide the application of the petitioner for grant of remission, which has been forwarded on 26.08.2025 to the District Magistrate, Janjgir-Champa (Annexure P10, P11, and P12) within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein above. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice padma