RAJKUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for a direction for the Respondents for releasing the Petitioner on parole.

(2.) During the course of hearing, the State Counsel had brought an order dtd. 19/10/2015 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Balodabazar-Bhatapara, refusing to grant parole to the Petitioner.

(3.) Counsel for the Petitioner submits that it is a case where the application of the Petitioner for grant of parole was sent for enquiry to the Station House Officer of Police Station, Bilaigarh, who had during the course of the investigation recorded the statements of some of the villagers and all of whom had not objected in any manner for the release of the Petitioner on parole, yet the Station House Officer has given a report of the likelihood of breach of peace if the Petitioner is released on parole. Based upon the said report of the Station House Officer, the Superintendent of Police, Balodabazar-Bhatapara also refused to recommend the case of the Petitioner for grant of parole. Subsequently, the Additional District Magistrate, Balodabazar-Bhataprara acting upon the said recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, also rejected the application of the Petitioner for grant of parole. Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that it is a case where the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate was without proper consideration of the rules governing the fields and it has been passed in a mechanical manner. Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the decision of this Bench rendered in Writ Petition (Cr.) No. 69 of 2016 wherein this Court had allowed a similar petition and ordered the concerned District Magistrate to pass a fresh order in the light of the rules applicable for the grant of parole.