1 - Ram Kumar S/o Sukhdev Prasad Suryavanshi Aged About 42 Years (Now Aged v. 1 State Of Chhat
Case Details
JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.09.02 10:36:36 +0530 1 2025:CGHC:44189-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 477 of 2025 1 - Ram Kumar S/o Sukhdev Prasad Suryavanshi Aged About 42 Years (Now Aged About 77 Years) R/o Daija P.S. Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Bhagirathi S/o Ledhooram Suryavanshi Aged About 48 Years R/o Daija P.S. Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Nanki Ram S/o Kariya Lal Suryavanshi Aged About 45 Years (Now Aged About 80 Years) R/o Daija P.S. Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Home Department (Jail) Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) Pin 492001 2 The Under Secretary State Of Chhattisgarh, Home (Jail) Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 3 The Director General Prisons And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh Head Quarter - Prisons And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) 4 The Jail Superintendent Central Jail Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioner(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha, Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Chief Justice , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 01.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Advocate General for respondents/State. 2. The petitioners have filed this petition praying for following relief:- 10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner for it's kind perusal 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ/order/direction and declare the provision given in Rule 358(3)(g) (two) of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 as illegal and unconstitutional 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction and quash/set-aside the letter/order dated 16.04.2025, 22.04.2025 & 08.05.2025 (Annexure P/1) issued/passed by the respondent no.2 10.4 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners or commanding the respondent authorities to grant the petitioner remission under Section 473 of BNSS Act, 2023/432 of Cr.P.C. further be pleased to release the petitioners by granting remission in respect of rest part of the sentence imposed upon 3 the petitioners. 10.5 That, Any other relief, which Hon'ble Court deems it fit proper, may also be provided in favour of the petitioner. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are convicted prisoners detained in Central Jail Bilaspur (C.G.). On 29.10.2010, the petitioners, vide judgment dated 29.10.2010, passed by the Learned 5th Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Session Case No. 279/02, was convicted under sections 147 & 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 02 years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine amount to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for 03 months for conviction under section 147 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of fine amount to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for 03 months for conviction under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860. The case of the petitioners for grant of remission under section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 was prepared and the case was sent for opinion to the Learned 1st Additional Session Judge Bilaspur (C.G.). Memo dated 01.02.2024, 22.12.2024 was issued by the Learned Additional Session Judge Bilaspur (C.G.), and thereby, opinion was given to accept the application under section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 if otherwise found lawful and proper. On 29.04.2024, 19.06.2024, the case of the petitioners for grant of 4 remission under section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 was sent to the respondent No.3. By order dated 16.04.2025, 22.04.2025 & 08.05.2025, the respondent No.2, rejected the proposal for grant of remission to the petitioner on the ground that there is ban/bar on pre mature release of the prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 in light of the provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the impugned letter/ order dated 16.04.2025, 22.04.2025 & 08.05.2025, passed/ issued by the respondent no.2 is arbitrary, illegal and against the law. The impugned letter/ order dated 16.04.2025, 22.04.2025 & 08.05.2025, has been passed/issued by the respondent No.2 just on basis of the bar/ban given in Rule 358(3)(g) (two) of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 without considering their good conduct during their detention period. The petitioners have undergone actual jail sentence for the period of more than 16 years and has completed more than 20 years of imprisonment together with earned remission, and therefore, the petitioners are entitled to pre-mature release under section 473 of the BNSS 2023 (432 of the Cr.P.C.). Further, the provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 has been amended vide notification dated 23.04.2025 and at present there is no bar/ban on pre-mature release of the prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, and therefore, the petitioners are eligible to be considered for pre- 5 mature release under section 473 of BNSS 2023 (432 of the Cr.P.C.). Also, several prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 have been released under remission of the rest part of sentence but in so far as the case of the petitioner is concerned, the same has been rejected on the ground of the bar/ban given in Rule 358(3)(g) (two) of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 and it is nothing but a clear discrimination again the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is similar to the case of Soyam Rama Vs State of Chhattisgarh (W.P.(Cr.) No. 448/2024 decided on 25.11.2024) and the case of Basant Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh (W.P.(Cr.) No. 100/2025 decided on 21.03.2025). 5. Learned counsel for the respondents/ State could not dispute the said fact that the impugned letter/ order dated 16.04.2025, 22.04.2025 & 08.05.2025, has been passed/issued by the respondent No.2 just on basis of the bar/ban given in Rule 358(3) (g) (two) of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 and not on merits and further, the provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule 1968 has been amended vide notification dated 23.04.2025 and at present, there is no bar/ban on pre-mature release of the prisoners convicted under section 302/149 of the IPC, and therefore, the petitioners are eligible to be considered for pre-mature release under section 473 of BNSS 2023 (432 of the Cr.P.C.). 6.
Decision
In view of the above facts and circumstances, the present petition 6 stands disposed of, with liberty to the petitioners to make an application for remission in view of the amended provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule, 1968 and the same shall be considered by the concerned authority, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 7. The Director General (Prison), State of Chhattisgarh is directed to ensure that the prisoners with identical situation be provided all the proper assistance for making a requisite application for remission in pursuance of the amended provision given in Rule 358 of C.G. Prisons Rule, 1968. 8. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit the copy of this order to the Director General (Prison), State of Chhattisgarh forthwith for necessary information and follow up action. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti