- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19964 WP No. 9339 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 9339 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: KALAMUGA RAO S/O. GHAGURLI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT- AMABANJI, GAMBHARI, BALANGIR, ORISSA- 767 027 (FATHER OF CHUDAMANI NAG. HAVING CTP NO. 15495 (NOW IN CUSTODY-CENTRAL PRISON, BENGALURU) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KIRAN S S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARIAT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE- 560 001 2. THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, PARAPPANAGHRAHARA, BANGALORE- 580 100 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ALI ASKER ROAD, Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19964 WP No. 9339 of 2026 VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT AS ANNEXURE-B ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 01/12/2025, IN NO./BCP/CTP- SEC/17172/2025, BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2/CENTRAL PRISON, BANGALORE, TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON PAROLE FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS IN PRISONER CTP NO.15495 CONVICTED BY THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER DATED 16.07.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE 68TH AT ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION COURT, BANGALORE IN S.C.NO.569/2015 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC.302, 201 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 2. ISSUE SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, FRESH MATTERS LIST, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Captioned petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "1. Issue a Writ of Certiorari by quashing the endorsement as ANNEXURE-B issued by the 2nd Respondent dated 01/12/2025, in No./BCP/CTP- Sec/17172/2025, by directing the Respondent - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19964 WP No. 9339 of 2026 No.2/Central Prison, Bangalore, to release the Petitioner on parole for a period of 90 days in prisoner CTP No.15495 convicted by the judgement and order dated 16.07.2025 passed by the Hon'ble 68th Additional District at Session Court, at Bangalore in S.C.No.569/2015 for the offences punishable U/sec.302, 201 of IPC, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Issue such other suitable orders or direction as this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Petitioner is convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 in SC No. 569/2015. Petitioner has undergone an incarceration for a period of more than 11 years. The petitioner's son/detenue has preferred an appeal before this Court. The counsel for petitioner submits that bail application of the petitioner is rejected. 3. Learned AGA, adverting to this rejection of bail application, has strongly contested in granting any indulgence on the ground that since bail is rejected, the convict's application seeking parole cannot be considered. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19964 WP No. 9339 of 2026 4. This contention is countered by the petitioner's counsel by placing reliance on the judgment rendered by the Co-Ordinate bench of this Court in an identical set of facts in the case of Eshwaramma .vs. State of Karnataka and another [W.P.No.101311/2025 decided on 14.8.2025]. Citing the said judgment, he would point out that grant of parole is on a different footing and rejection of bail application cannot constitute an impediment to consider the detenue's request for general parole. The petitioner is seeking general parole on the ground that he intends to renovate his house which is in a dilapidated condition. 5. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that parole is not a matter of charity, but a facet of the reformative theory of punishment, which has now gained constitutional recognition as part of humane administration of criminal justice. The object of parole is to enable a convict to maintain social ties, to attend to pressing personal and family exigencies, and to facilitate - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19964 WP No. 9339 of 2026 reintegration into society. The denial of parole, therefore, cannot be mechanical or founded on vague apprehensions, but must be based on cogent and substantial material demonstrating real and imminent threat to public order or safety. 6. The doctrine governing parole has been consistently evolved by constitutional Courts to balance two competing interests on the one hand, the societal interest in ensuring safety and order, and on the other, the convict’s right to dignity and reformation under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Parole, thus, serves as a controlled and conditional liberty, which does not interrupt the sentence but merely suspends its execution temporarily. 7. In the present case on hand, the fact that petitioner's son is subjected to incarceration for more than 11 years, this Court is inclined to grant parole despite his bail application being rejected by this Court. In my - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19964 WP No. 9339 of 2026 considered opinion, the rejection of parole application on the ground that bail application filed by the detenue is pending consideration is unsustainable. 8. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed; (ii) The respondents are directed to release the convict Choodamani Nag, bearing CTP No.15495, on general parole for a period of 90 (ninety) days from the date of his release; (iii) The release shall be subject to the detenue furnishing an undertaking that he shall not indulge in any unlawful activities during the period of parole and shall maintain good conduct; (iv) The respondents shall impose stringent conditions, including but not limited to: requiring the detenue to report before the jurisdictional police at periodic intervals, restricting his movement, and ensuring that he does not, directly - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19964 WP No. 9339 of 2026 or indirectly, make any contact with the victim or his family members; (v) The detenue shall surrender before the jurisdictional prison authorities immediately upon expiry of the parole period, failing which appropriate action shall be taken in accordance with law; (vi) Any violation of the conditions imposed shall entail immediate cancellation of parole; (vii) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to seek extension of parole, if permissible in law; (viii) The Registry is directed to communicate this order forthwith to the concerned prison authorities, including by electronic mode, for immediate compliance. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 80