ORDER :

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to release him on leave under the Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules, 1989 and also to quash the order rejecting leave of the petitioner, if formally passed by District Magistrate, Korba (C.G.)

2. The brief facts as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner is in jail since 28.01.2015 as he was involved in commission of offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. for lifetime imprisonment in pursuance of the order of punishment dated 29.12.2015 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Korba (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 54/2015.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the State of Chhattisgarh has framed the Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules, 1989 (for short “the Rules, 1989”) in exercise of powers conferred under Section 31A of the Prisoners Act, 1900 (for short “the Act, 1900”). Rule 4-A of the Rules, 1989 provides for eligibility for leave to the prisoner. Rule 6 of the Rules, 1989 provides for sanctioning authority for first leave. Rule 8 of the Rules, 1989 provides for sanctioning authority for subsequent leaves. Rule 9 of the Rules, 1989 provides for conditions for release on leave. He would further submit that since the petitioner has been convicted vide order dated 28.01.2015 and he has completed more than six years of jail sentence, therefore, as per the Rules, 1989, he is entitled to be released on parole.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would rely upon the judgment dated 18.11.2021 (Annexure P/2) passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (Cr.) No. 29 of 2016 (Rakesh Shende Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others) and judgment dated 23.01.2018 (Annexure P/3) passed in Writ Petition (Cr.) No. 524 of 2017 (Rajman Yadav Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others) wherein grant of parole has been considered by the Coordinate Bench. He would further submit that the petitioner is similarly situated person, therefore, his case also deserves to be considered as per the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Hence, it is prayed that on the above factual matrix, the petitioner may be released on parole.

5. Learned State counsel has filed reply, in which, it has been submitted that vide order dated 28.12.2019, the District Magistrate, Korba has rejected the application of the petitioner for release him on parole. In the order, the District Magistrate, Korba has observed that there is a lot of strain between family of deceased- Santosh Das and family of petitioner- Ratan Das, therefore, his release on parole may create untoward incident and father of the petitioner is also not interested for releasing of the petitioner on parole. If the petitioner is released on parole, peace of the area may be adversely affected. Due to model code of conduct, affected party is also annoyed with Prisoner, therefore, it will not be proper to release the petitioner on parole. Even Police Assistance Station – Rampur has also made recommendation that the petitioner may not be released on parole. The order passed by the District Magistrate, Korba is legal which does not warrant any interference by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that this writ petition may kindly be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records annexed with the petition with utmost satisfaction.

7. The Prisoners Act, 1900 was enacted to consolidate the several Acts relating to prisoners confined by order of a Court. Section 31 of the Act relates to grant of leave to the prisoners. Sections 31-A to 31-E of the Act have been inserted by the M.P. Amendment Act by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh, which are still applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh, which are extracted below :-

“31-A. Grant of leave to Prisoners.--(1) Subject to the provisions to this part and to such conditions as may be prescribed, the State Government or any authority to which the State Government may delegate its powe