SANJAY MAHANT S/O GHURBEEN DAS @ VISHWANATH MAHANT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH ITS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARYLABIC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this Petition, the Petitioner is questioning the propriety and validity of the order dated 13.03.2018 passed by the District Magistrate, Raigarh, whereby the application filed by the Petitioner under Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules, 1989 (for short the Rules of 1989) for his release on leave has been rejected.

(2.) Shri Pillai, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the order impugned as passed by the District Magistrate is apparently contrary to law. While passing the order impugned, the learned District Magistrate ought to have given his opinion as required under Rule-6 of the Rules of 1989. However, without forming any opinion as required, the order impugned has been passed which is liable to be set aside. Shri Pillai submits further that an inquiry was conducted on the basis of his application in which, the concerned Panchayat as well as the members of the said vicinity have raised their no objection with regard to the releasing of the Petitioner and submits further that although the relatives of the victim have raised their objection in this regard, but the same ought not to have been taken into consideration as a ground for refusal of his application as per the provisions prescribed under Rule 6 of the Rules of 1989. According to him, the application could be rejected only if it is found based upon the enquiry that the release of the Petitioner would be detrimental to the public interest. In absence of such an opinion, his application ought not to have been refused. The order impugned is therefore, liable to be set aside.

(3.) On the other hand, Shri Arvind Dubey, learned Counsel appearing for the State, while supporting the order impugned, submits that the inquiry was duly conducted in the matter on the basis of the application filed by the Petitioner, where the relatives of the victim have raised their specific objection that if the Petitioner would be released, then it could be dangerous to their lives. It is, therefore submitted by him that in view of the objections raised by the relatives of the victim, the release of the Petitioner as such could be dangerous to the public safety. As such, the order impugned has rightly been passed by the learned District Magistrate, Raigarh on 13.03.2018 and therefore, the same deserves to be upheld.