- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12977 WP No. 116 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 116 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. VENKATESH S/O MUTTHU AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NO.33, 3RD CROSS NARASIPURA LAYOUT VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU -560 084 PERMANENT ADDRESS GUTTE PALYA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 562 123 NOW IN CENTRAL PRISON, HAVING CTP NO.15041, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, BENGALURU-560100 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAO LOKANDE N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHAN SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001. Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12977 WP No. 116 of 2026 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, BENGALURU-560100. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KARNATAKA PRISON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES SHESHADRI ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009 5. STATE OF KARNATAKA DODDABELAVANGALA POLICE BENGALURU - 560 063 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON EXTENSION OF EMERGENCY PAROLE FOR MORE 30 DAYS (CONSIDERING PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-C) TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking extension of parole granted by this Court in W.P.No.10735/2025 vide order dated 01.12.2025. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12977 WP No. 116 of 2026 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State. Perused the order passed by this Court. 3. It would be opposite for this Court to extract the operative portion of the Order passed in W.P.No.10735/2025, which reads as under: "a. The writ petition is allowed in part; b. Respondent No.4-the Chief Superintendent of Prison, Bengaluru, is directed to release Venkatesh (CTP No.15041) on parole for a period of 30 days commencing from 12.12.2025, subject to the following conditions: (i) The prisoner (CTP No.15041) shall mark his attendance in the jurisdictional Police Station, weekly once throughout the period of his parole and it would be the responsibility of the jurisdictional Police to take him to gaol, in the event, the convict (CTP No.15041) would evade going back to the gaol, after the expiry of the period of general parole. (ii) Respondent No.4 shall stipulate strict conditions as are usually stipulated to ensure return of the detenue to the gaol and that he shall not commit any other offence during then period of parole. c. The Registry is directed to communicate the order to the prison authority for its immediate execution." - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12977 WP No. 116 of 2026 4. A careful reading of the operative portion extracted hereinabove makes it abundantly clear that this Court had granted parole to the petitioner for a fixed and definite period of 30 days. The direction was unequivocal and time-bound. The petitioner now contends that though the order was passed on 01.12.2025, he was actually released on 12.12.2025 and, therefore, according to him, the period of parole came to an end only on 10.01.2026. Even if the said submission is accepted for the sake of argument, it remains an undisputed fact that the period of parole has long since expired. Though the present petition seeking extension was instituted on 03.01.2026, no earnest steps were taken by the petitioner to have the matter listed and obtain appropriate interim or extension orders before the expiry of the parole period. We are now in March 2026. The relief sought is one for extension of parole which, by its very nature, must be considered during the subsistence of the parole period. Once the parole period has run its course and the convict is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12977 WP No. 116 of 2026 expected to have reported back to the prison authorities in compliance with the earlier order, the question of extending a concluded parole does not arise. It is also relevant to note that the grounds urged in support of extension are substantially the same as those which weighed with this Court while granting the earlier parole, namely, the illness of the petitioner’s aged mother. Parole having already been granted for 30 days on the said ground and the period having expired, this Court cannot, at this belated stage, examine the prayer for extension. Therefore, the relief sought has become infructuous and does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23