1 2026:CGHC:20142-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 235 of 2026 Sakharam Sahu S/o Bhaiyaram Sahu, aged about 75 years R/o Village- Newari, Police Station- Suhela, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.), Presently Lodged In Raipur Central Jail, Durg (C.G.) Since In Jail Through His Son Ghanaram Sahu S/o- Sakharam Sahu, Presently Aged About 49 Years, R/o Village- Newari, Police Station- Suhela, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Additional Secretary, Home (Jail) Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director General (Prisons And Rehabilitation Services) Jail Department, Jail Headquarters, Sector- 19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Jail Superintendent Raipur, Central Jail, Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector Balodabazar- Bhatapara District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 30 . 04 .202 6 1. Heard Ms. Aditi Singhvi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Saumya Rai, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent State to prematurely release the petitioner, in accordance with law, in the interest of justice. 10.2. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the application of the petitioner for pre-mature release/remission with 45 days from the date of order, in accordance with law. 10.3 That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to send back the records of Sessions Case No. 47/2008, to the Special Judge (Atrocities), District- Raipur (C.G) and direct the Learned Trial Court to give opinion immediately after the receipt of records. 10.4 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deem fit in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is presently serving his life imprisonment at Raipur Central Jail and has completed a total of more than 14 years of actual imprisonment and more than 18 years and 10 months of imprisonment including remission earned as on February 2026. She further submitted that after the petitioner become eligible for consideration for premature release under the provisions of CG Prison Rules, an opinion was sought from the Presiding Judge by the respondent No.03, vide letter dated 13.08.2025. However, vide memo dated 20.08.2025, it was informed by the learned Trial Court that since the original records of the case have been sent to the Hon'ble High Court and hence the opinion can only be given after the records are received and that the petitioner can again make an 3 application once the original records are received. 4. Application for remission submitted by the petitioner could not be decided as the opinion of the Presiding Officer was required and because the trial Court records have been summoned by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in an office reference, bearing CRR No. 344 of 2014, which has been registered in compliance of the order dated 17.04.2014 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court against Ilaram Sahu, who has been acquitted by the learned Trial Court and accordingly, the record of the trial Court is enclosed with said revision petition. 5. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure that the record of the trial Court, which is enclosed along with CRR No. 344 of 2014, be send back to the concerned trial Court for the aforesaid purpose within one week from today and as soon as the opinion has been given by the learned trial Court, the record will be transmitted to the Registry of this Court, which shall be placed along with the said revision petition. 6. It is further directed that the application for remission submitted by the petitioner shall be decided within a further period of two weeks from the date of receiving opinion from the concerned trial Court. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra