Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Annappa Mariyappa Hiremani, S/o. Mariyappa Hiremani – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Represented By Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Law – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks premature release on parole. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. previous case law supports petitioner's request for consideration. (Para 3) |
| 3. court mandates committee meetings and parole conditions. (Para 4) |
| 4. petitioner's application not considered timely. (Para 5) |
ORDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:
a. “Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order as per Annexure-E proceedings dated 30.06.2025 as Respondent No.4 Committee as far as only the Petitioner is concerned and consequently direct Respondent no.3 Committee to consider the request made by the Petitioner herein for his premature Release in strict compliance of the Notification/Guidelines produced at Annexure-J and consequently direct Respondent No.5 to extend remission and to release the Petitioner on General Parole for a period of 90 days with timely extension from Central Prison, Bellary till his Representation seeking for his Premature Release produced at Annexure-D dated 30.06.2025 is considered by the concerned authorities.
b. Issue any other writ or Order or Direction that deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the i
The Committee for premature release must meet regularly to timely consider applications; failure to do so infringes the rights of convicts entitled to such reviews.
Where any convict undergoing life imprisonment has already been released on bail by orders of Court, order granting interim bail shall continue to remain in operation until disposal of application fo....
The court established that life convicts' applications for premature release must be processed promptly, requiring the committee to meet every two months.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the decision-making process of the Review Committee in refusing premature release to the petitioner was justified and in accordance with the r....
The court mandated the reconsideration of a convict's premature release proposal, emphasizing rehabilitation, age, and new evidence over the initial decision to reject it based on the severity of the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of a proposal for premature release should consider the convict's health condition, conduct in prison, and the impact of their r....
The exercise of executive power of clemency is a duty vested in the Authority for the welfare of the people, and the case of premature release of a life convict is governed by the policy/guidelines o....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
