SATISH MESHRAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ishan Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sudeep Verma, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents.

(2.) The petitioner's application for grant of leave (parole) has been rejected by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Kondagaon (C.G.) by order dtd. 25/3/2021 (Annexure P/1) on the recommendation of the concerned Superintendent of Police holding that the petitioner's release is likely to lead quarrel and dispute by the petitioner with the victim's family and petitioner is likely to commit cognizable offence.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Rule 4 of the Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules 1989 (in brevity 'the Rule, 1989') as well as Rules 6, 9 11 and 12 of the Rules, 1989 have not been considered by the District Magistrate while deciding the petitioner's application for grant of leave on parole and it was rejected summarily, therefore, the order passed by the District Magistrate dtd. 25/3/2021 is liable to be set aside and the petition deserves to be allowed.