KHEDURAM PATRE Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition is against the order dtd. 8/11/2021 passed by the District Magistrate Mungeli whereby the application filed by the petitioner to release him on parole was dismissed on the ground that objection has been made by the family of the victim.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in jail since 19/7/2016 and he deserves to be released on parole as per the C.G. Prisoners Rule, 1989. He further submits that during enquiry, two sureties namely Tularam Patre and Dwarika Prasad assured that the accused would be retained in their control if he is granted parole and their statements were recorded. It is submitted that the Sarpanch and Upsarpanch of Village Panchayat Gatapar also did not object for grant of parole. However, the wife of the victim Smt. Gulaba Bai objected to grant parole to the petitioner, therefore, the application was rejected. Learned counsel submits that parole is a reformative process and the privilege granted by the State cannot be denied for the vague reasons, so the rejection of parole is completely illegal.

(3.) The reply filed by the State shows that the petitioner was punished under Sec. 148 and 302 of I.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Mungeli and was sentenced to Life Imprisonment and it is further contended that the State has exercised the power under the Prisoner's Act 1900 and the Rules made thereunder which are called as Chhattisgarh Leave Rules, 1989 and eventually the rejection order was passed.