Sri Govindaraju v. The Union of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 6986 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SRI. GOVINDARAJU, S/O VENKATAIAH @ YALLAPPA, AGE. 36 YEARS, R/AT. NO. HOSAPURA VILLAGE, AMRUTHURU HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMAKURU-572130.

PRESENTLY SERVING SENTENCE IN BENGALURU CENTRAL PRISON (CTP NO.8348) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADEEP PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER SRI. CLIFTON D' ROZARIO, APPOINTED AS AMICUS CURIAE)

AND:

¶1THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY (JUDICIAL WING), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, HALL NO.17, 2ND FLOOR, MAJOR DHYAN CHAND NATIONAL STADIUM, INDIA GATE, NEW DELHI-110 002.

¶2THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶3THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES NO.9, SHESHADRI ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560009.

® VINAYAKA B V Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2026.08.13 14:55:35 +0530

¶4THE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, BENGALURU-560100. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN. H, DSGI FOR R1; SRI. V.G.BHANUPRAKASH, AAG FOR SRI. HEMAKUMAR, AGA FOR R2 TO R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE 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 ANNEXURE-A AND BE FURTHER PLEASED TO DIRECT THE PREMATURE RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER IN TERMS OF THE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER

The present petition has been filed seeking for extension of parole granted to the petitioner, till decision is taken by the State Government for premature release of the life convict.

¶2The petitioner has also sought for strict adherence to the Government Order bearing No.HD 119 PRA 2018, BENGALURU dated 21.04.2020.

¶3The facts made out are that the petitioner was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. It is asserted that though the petitioner as on 12.11.2024 had undergone

imprisonment of 15 years and 4 months and despite his case falling within the framework of Government Notification which would entitle him for 'premature release', there was undue delay in considering his case for 'premature release'.

¶4It is in the context of delay in considering and passing orders by the Executive Authorities in considering the case for 'premature release' that the Court had embarked on the exercise of engaging with the State for formulating a Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] to facilitate the expeditious consideration of cases of convicts for premature release as is permissible under the applicable framework of the Government Notification.

¶5Mr. Clifton D' Rozario, Amicus Curiae has filed a short brief on premature release of life convicts.

¶6It is submitted that the SOP prepared by the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is exhaustive and comprehensive and has received an imprimatur from the Apex Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition [Crl.] No.4/2021 'In Re: Policy

Strategy for Grant of Bail' with Special Leave Petition [Crl.] No.529/2021.

¶7Sri V.G.Bhanuprakash, learned Additional Advocate General appearing along with learned Additional Government Advocate Sri Hemakumar for respondent State also relies on the Affidavit filed by the Under Secretary to Government, Home Department (Prison and Cinema) and states that the SOP by NALSA appears to be comprehensive.

¶8It is further submitted that in order to avoid duplication, the present proceedings may be closed, while reiterating the requirement of following the SOP of NALSA in letter and spirit.

¶9It is noticed that the SOP is required to be adhered to. It would be appropriate for a reiteration of timelines in the SOP as extracted hereinbelow:- "Timelines:

¶26The timelines prescribed across the SOP, stage by stage, are as follows: Stage Specified time period Preparation of the eligibility list by the prison superintendent Once every four months, in January, May, and September

Sharing of the eligibility list with the DLSA Within days of its preparation Issuance of the DLSA's roster of jail visiting lawyers/paralegals Within 4 days of receiving the list Reminder to authorities for documents not received If not received within 30 days of the request Completion of document compilation and the application Within two months Forwarding of the complete file by the Nodal Officer to the recommending authority Within one month Meeting of the recommending authority Once every four months, preferably in April, August, and December Forwarding of the recommendation to the appropriate government Within 10 days of the meeting Decision of the appropriate government on the recommendation Within one month of receiving it On rejection: - appointment of a panel lawyer by the High Court Legal Services Committee - interaction with the convict - filing of the petition

- Within one week

- Within one week - Within fifteen days On rejection: - appointment of a lawyer by the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee - interaction with the convict - filing of the petition

- Within one week

- Within two weeks - Within thirty days

Updating of parole/furlough records by the Prison Legal Aid Clinic Once every quarter, in January, April, July, and October Quarterly report by the DLSA to the SLSA, and annual State-wise report by the SLSA to NALSA

Meeting of district-level coordination committees Once every three months, with minutes sent to the SLSA within 15 days.

¶10Further, the Flow Chart of procedure for handling applications of 'premature release/remission', which is part of SOP of NALSA is also extracted hereinbelow for the purpose of reiteration.

¶11Insofar as the case of the petitioner is concerned, it is submitted on behalf of the respondent State that his case is at an advanced stage of consideration and decision would be taken shortly. This Court has already ordered for release of the petitioner on parole till final orders on his 'premature release' is passed. Such order would be in force and be subject to the conditions imposed till a final decision is taken by the State Government.

¶12Needless to state that, in the event that the petitioner has any subsisting grievance, it is open for the petitioner to take appropriate proceedings.

¶13Accordingly, the proceedings are closed and petition is disposed of, in light of the above observations.

¶14It is only expected that the procedure prescribed by NALSA would be adhered to in letter and spirit.

¶15The Court places on record its appreciation for the assistance and efforts of Sri Shanthi Bhushan. H, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, High Court of Karnataka,

Bengaluru, Sri V.G.Bhanuprakash, learned Additional Advocate General, Sri Mallanna Goud, learned CGSC, Sri Hemakumar learned Additional Government Advocate, Ms. Sakshi Khotari, learned advocate and Mr. Clifton D' Rozario, Amicus Curiae.

Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

VGR LIST NO.: 19 SL NO.: 1