1 2026:CGHC:6176-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 74 of 2026 • Dharam S/o Shri Mahesh, Aged About 45 Years, Caste- Suryavanshi, R/o Village Sakareli Bhatha, Police Station- Baradwar, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home (Jail) Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Head Quarter- Prisons and Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Jail Superintendent, Central Jail Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate For State-Respondents : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 04-02-2026 1. Heard Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Priyank Rathi, learned Government Advocate for the State/respondents No. 1 to 3. Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN Date: 2026.02.06 11:20:02 +0530 2 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the following relief(s):- “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 it’s kind perusal; 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 Procedure1973/473 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.” 3. By way of this petition, the petitioner is challenging the arbitrariness on the part of the respondents in causing delay in deciding the case/prayer of the petitioner for remission of rest part of sentence under section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (in short ‘ the Cr.P.C.’)/ 473 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’). 3 4. Mr. Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has undergone actual jail sentence for the period more than 18 years and has completed more than 22 years and 09 months of imprisonment together with earned remission, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to remission under section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (under Section 473 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). The fresh application preferred by the petitioner for remission of the rest part of sentence is pending since July 2025 and a period of more than 07 months has already expired but it is the extreme arbitrariness on the part of the respondent authorities who are causing delay in deciding the case/prayer of the petitioner for remission of rest part of sentence under section 432 of the Cr.P.C. / Section 473 of the BNSS. 5. Mr. Soni further submits that the petitioner has submitted his first application for remission of rest part of sentence under Section 432 of the Cr.P.C. on 09.05.2023, thereafter, on 13.05.2025 he again submitted application for release under Section 473(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and his last application for pre-mature release/remission of rest part of sentence has been submitted before the authority concerned on 03.07.2025 which is still pending. As such, since 09.05.2023 a period of more than 02 years and 08 months have already been lapsed but the case/prayer of the petitioner for remission of rest part of sentence under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal 4 Procedure, 1973/473 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has not been decided. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that three co-accused persons who were involved in the offence have already been granted benefit of remission, whereas, the application of the petitioner is pending since 2023. 6. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondents also endorses the fact that the petitioner’s case for remission is still pending for consideration. 7. In view of the above submissions, the respondent authority concerned is directed to decide the case of the petitioner for remission as early as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order. 8 With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Aadil