2026:CGHC:16286-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 191 of 2026 Vijay Kumar Sen S/o Suresh Sen Aged About 49 Years R/o Village-

MANPREET Sulsuli, Ps- Deori District- Balod (C.G.) Permanent R/o Village- Mokhli, KAUR Digitally signed b K y A U M R ANPREET Police Station Lalbaug District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Presently Lodged Date: 2026.04.10 11:02:56 +0530 In Durg Central Jail Durg (C.G.) Since In Jail Through His Friend Vikas Jain S/o Santosh Jain Presently Aged About 39 Years R/o 2112, Zonal Market Sector- 10, Bhilai District- Durg (C.G.)

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Additional Secretary Home (Jail) Department Government Of Chhattisgarh Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Director General (Prisons And Rehabilitation Service Jail Department Jail Headquarters Sector-19 Nava Raipur Atal Nagar Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Jail Superintendent Durg Central Jail Durg (C.G.)

4 - Collector Rajnandgaon District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

09.04.2026

1. Heard Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Priyank Rathi, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

“10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 14.02.2026 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent authorities and direct the Respondent State to prematurely release the petitioner, in accordance with law, in the interest of justice.

10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deem fit in the interest of justice.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner stands convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has been sentenced to life imprisonment vide judgment dated 20.10.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Rajnandgaon in S.T. No. 25/2010, which conviction has been affirmed by this Court in CRA No. 826/2010 vide judgment dated 20.09.2017, and the Special Leave Petition preferred before the Hon’ble Supreme Court also came to be dismissed on 01.07.2019. The petitioner is in custody since 17.01.2010 and has undergone more than 19 years of incarceration including remission, with over 15 years of actual imprisonment, and is presently lodged in Central Jail, Durg. Further, upon becoming eligible for consideration of premature release under the applicable provisions of the Chhattisgarh Prison Rules, the competent authorities, including the learned Presiding Judge, the Jail Superintendent, the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, have all rendered favourable opinions recommending the petitioner’s release, also taking note of his satisfactory conduct and his disciplined behavior during parole granted on six occasions. Despite such consistent and favourable recommendations and the petitioner fulfilling the statutory requirements, the respondent State has rejected the petitioner’s application for premature release vide impugned order dated 14.02.2026 solely on the ground of the gravity of the offence, without adverting to the mandatory considerations prescribed under amended Rule 358 of the Chhattisgarh Prison Rules, 1968; that the impugned order is ex facie arbitrary, non-speaking and bereft of cogent reasons, inasmuch as it fails to reflect any application of mind to relevant factors such as the petitioner’s long period of incarceration, reformation, conduct, and the favourable reports of all concerned authorities, and instead relies upon an irrelevant and solitary consideration.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that under the statutory framework, particularly Rule 358 and