- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22457 WP No. 13027 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 13027 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SRI SURESH S/O LALARAM AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT 79, B BHALIO KA BAS BHAGESAR PALLI, RAJASTAN - 306 401 PETITIONER IS THE BROTHER OF THE CONVICT PRISONER NO 18355 KISHAN CURRENTLY SERVING SENTENCE IN CENTRAL PRISON MYSORE - 570 007. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PRADEEP PATIL, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE LIFE CONVICTS RELEASE COMMITTEE HOME DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES NO.9 SHESHADRI ROAD GANDHI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, MYSORE - 570 007. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA) Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22457 WP No. 13027 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-ISSUER A WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS TO BE PLEASED TO ACT IN STRICT COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. HD 119 PRA 2018, BENGALURU DATED 21.04.2020 PRODUCED AS ANNX-A AND BE FURTHER PLEASED TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER PLEASED TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PRISONER NO. 18355 KRISHNA S/O LALARAMJI FOR PREMATURE RELEASE IN TERMS OF THE ANNX-A. 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 1. The captioned petition is filed by the petitioner, seeking a direction against respondent No.2, to act on the recommendation made by the Advisory Board and take appropriate decision. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the respondents. 3. This Court has carefully perused the material placed on record. The petitioner is the brother of the convict prisoner, namely, Kishan (CTP No.18355), presently lodged in Central Prison, Mysuru. The said convict is undergoing sentence pursuant to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22457 WP No. 13027 of 2026 rendered in S.C. No.463/2003 by the Court of IV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 364A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is not in dispute that the convict has undergone incarceration for a period of more than twenty (20) years. In that backdrop, the case of the convict was placed before the Advisory Board constituted for considering premature release of life convicts and the Board, upon due evaluation of the eligibility criteria and relevant parameters, has recommended the name of the said convict for premature release and forwarded the same to respondent No.2 for further consideration. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite such recommendation by the Advisory Board, the competent authority, namely respondent No.2, has not taken any decision and has not placed the matter before the Cabinet for final consideration. This inaction, according to the petitioner, has resulted in prolonging the incarceration of the convict, notwithstanding the favourable recommendation. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22457 WP No. 13027 of 2026 5. This Court finds that once the Advisory Board, upon objective consideration, has recommended the case of a convict who has completed more than two decades of incarceration, the matter warrants expeditious consideration by the competent authority. The records would indicate that the recommendation is not in dispute and the only impediment is the delay in taking a final decision at the level of respondent No.2. 6. This Court, in an identical set of circumstances in Venkatesh vs. State of Karnataka and Others - WP No.17178/2025 dated 11.11.2025, has held that where a convict has undergone substantial period of incarceration and the Advisory Board has recommended the case for premature release, such convict would be entitled to be enlarged on parole pending final decision by the Government. The said principle squarely applies to the case on hand. 7. Having regard to the consistent view taken by this Court in similar matters, coupled with the fact that the Advisory Board has already recommended the case of the present convict for premature release, this Court is of the considered - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22457 WP No. 13027 of 2026 opinion that interim indulgence deserves to be extended, so as to balance the rights of the convict with the administrative process that is yet to attain finality. 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to consider the recommendation of the Advisory Board in respect of convict Kishan (CTP No.18355) and take a decision strictly in accordance with law, with utmost expedition. (iii) Respondent No.2 shall ensure that the matter is placed before the competent authority/Cabinet for final decision within a reasonable time frame. (iv) Pending such consideration and final decision, respondent No.3 – the jurisdictional prison authority, is directed to release the convict Kishan (CTP No.18355), Central Prison, Mysuru, on general parole, subject to such - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22457 WP No. 13027 of 2026 conditions as may be imposed by the competent authority to secure his presence and maintain public order. (v) It is made clear that the release ordered herein is purely interim in nature and shall be subject to the final decision to be taken by respondent Nos.1 and 2 on the recommendation of the Advisory Board. (vi) Liberty is reserved to the respondents to impose appropriate safeguards and conditions, including reporting requirements, to ensure compliance during the period of parole. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20