GOUTAM BHADURI, J.

1. Heard.

2. The present petition is against the rejection of prayer for release the petitioner on parole. It is been contended that the prayer for release on parole has been rejected which has not been communicated to the petitioner in writing.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was entitled for parole as per the rules and in the return of the State it is stated that though the grant of temporary release of the petitioner is for 12 days was forwarded through the Jail Superintendent, Central Jail, Bilaspur, wherein the District Magistrate, District Janjgir-Champa sought a report in respect of the petitioner from the Superintendent of Police, District Janjgir-Champa. In turn the Superintendent of Police, Janjgir-Champa directed the SHO, Police Station Malkharoda, District Janjgir-Champa to get a report, who in turn submitted a report, whereby an objection was made that the petitioner if is released then the law and order situation may arise and the petitioner may threaten to the family members of the deceased and may further abscond.

4. Having considered the rival contentions put forth on behalf of either side what is relevant at this juncture is that the State Government has enacted specific rules in respect of grant of leave to the prisoners in exercise of its powers conferred upon it under the provisions of the Prisoners Act, 1900. The said Rules in the State of Chhattisgarh are known as ‘The Chhattisgarh Prisoner’s Leave Rules, 1989’. Rule 4 of the Rules of 1989 deals with the conditions of leave. For ready reference the said clause is reproduced herein below :

4. Conditions of Leave. The prisoners shall be granted leave under sub-section (1) of Section 31-A of the Act on the following conditions, namely :

(a) He fulfills the conditions laid down in Section 31-A of the Act;

(b) He has not committed any offences in jail between the date of application for leave and receipt of the order of such leave;

(c) The releasing authority must be satisfied that the leave may be granted without detriment to the public interest;

(d) He gives in writing to the Releasing Authority the place or places which he intends to visit during the period of his leave and undertake not to visit any other place during such period without obtaining prior permission of the Releasing Authority in that behalf; and

(e) He should furnish security to the satisfaction of the Releasing Authority if such security is demanded by the Releasing Authority.”

5. Similarly, Rule 6 of the Rules of 1989 deals with the powers conferred upon the sanctioning authority while considering the application for grant of leave, which again for ready reference is reproduced hereinbelow :

“6. Sanctioning Authority for first leave. (a) If the District Magistrate, after making such enquiry as he may consider necessary, is satisfied that the request for grant of leave can be granted without detriment to public interest, he shall issue to the Superintendent a duly signed and sealed warrant in Form ‘A’ to the prisoner. The District Magistrate shall enter in the warrant the number of days that will be required for the journeys by the shortest practicable route to and from the place at which during his leave the prisoner proposes to reside or if he proposes to visit more than one place, the fartherest place from the Jail which he proposed to visit. Note. The District Magistrate is responsible for the proper carrying out of these instructions. He may of course, consult the District Superintendent of Police on the advisability of granting the leave. The Superintendent of Police should also obtain the opinion of the Gram Panchayat of the village where the prisoner resided before conviction and send to the District Magistrate along with his report. But the responsibility for the action is that of the District Magistrate. He should use his discretion and should refuse to grant leave only in cases in which he satisfied that release is fraught with