AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORAL ORDER
Convict (CTP 12267) is husband of the petitioner, convicted for offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section (3)(i)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 on 30.11.2015 and is stated to have completed serving of his sentence for 12 years 11 months 11 days.
Convict (CTP 12267) was earlier granted general parole vide order dated 20.03.2026 for a period of 30 days, enabling him to repair/construct his residential house. He stated to have surrendered before the time stipulated.
While he was in parole, an application was filed seeking extension of parole by another 60 days, which is however rejected by the impugned order dated 22.05.2026. Hence, this petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner appeared through video conference submits that there are no male members in the family except a son who is pursuing his education at Bengaluru. Petitioner herself and the daughter are the only female members and they are not able to supervise the house construction work. Therefore, release of convict (CTP 12267) for limited period would ease out the situation. Hence request for extension of parole was made which has been rejected. He further submits that the convict (CTP 12267) has served for 12 years 11 months 11 days and is also entitled for earlier remission. Despite that he is seeking extension of parole, in the event of his release he can realign with the society. Therefore he seeks for appropriate direction to the respondent/authority to consider extension of parole.
Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that once parole is granted and convict surrenders, there is no scope for extension of the same. He referees to rule 191 of Karnataka Prison (Amendment) Rules, 2000.
Be that as it is. There has been no adverse remark on the convict. Convict (CTP 12267) had in his entire duration serving the sentence, stated to have intermittently completed 4 months 10 days of parole.
The reason assigned for extension is for repairing work of his house and petitioner has no male member except the Convict (CTP 12267).
The Apex Court in the case of Asfaq Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in (2017) 15 SCC 55 has recognized considering the request for release on parole for the purpose of carrying out construction/repair of the residential house. Since the husband of the petitioner has already served the sentence of 12 years 11 months 11 days as noted above and the reason for extension is for the construction of house, this Court deems it appropriate to issue direction to the Jail Authority to consider the application for extension for a period of 45 days.
This Court deems it appropriate to allow the petition, subject to the following conditions:
Respondent No.2 shall consider the request for extension of parole to convict (CTP No.12267) for another period of 45 days.
Respondent No.2 shall verify the facts of there being no other male members in the family as claimed except the convict (CTP No.12267), and his son.
Such considerations shall be made within an outer limit of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
During the said period of parole, the convict (CTP No.12267) shall appear before the jurisdictional police once in a week and mark his signature. He shall surrender to the prison on or before expiry of the period of parole.
Convict (CTP No.12267) shall not involve himself in any illegal or criminal activities.
In the event of breach of any of the conditions, the convict (CTP No.12267) shall immediately be secured and sent back to prison.
The respondent-police shall also ensure that, on expiry of the parole period, the convict (CTP No.12267) is sent back to prison.
Authorities may impose any such condition as permissible under law.
Registry is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Jail Authorities.