Karnataka High Court Directs State To Digitise Parole Process, Build Online Dashboard For Tracking Applications

The Karnataka High Court has suggested that applications seeking parole leave–which presently have to be drafted on paper and submitted physically, be permitted to be filed and processed electronically and the details of the same must be made available in electronic form. Justice Suraj Govindaraj in his order noted that all the applications for parole are made on physical paper, are submitted physically and require a physical follow-up.The court thus said:"The family of a prisoner may not be resident within the jurisdiction where the prisoner is incarcerated. It would therefore for this and several other factors be required that the procedure for parole in Chapter 34 of the Manual of 2021(Karnataka Prisoners and Corrections Service Manual), be e-enabled such that all applications are filed electronically, processed electronically and the details thereof are also available electronically".The court directed the Director General of Police, (Police IT), to submit a detailed project report in this regard within a period of four weeks. “While doing so, the Director General of Police could also look at e-enabling the various other provisions of the Manual 2021 since there appears to be several dependencies between those provisions,” it said.The court also suggested that for the purpose of transparency, a dashboard can be built on the website of the Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services, giving all details related to parole, the number of applications filed, allowed, rejected, period, reasons for rejection, etc.The direction was given while allowing a petition filed by Radhamma the mother of a rape convict, seeking his son's release from prison for a period of 30 days, for assisting her in repairs of their house. The court noted that under Regulation 638 of Karnataka Prisoners and Corrections Service Manual, 2021 provides that on receiving an application from a convict for grant of parole leave, the concerned Chief Superintendent /Superintendent of Prisons shall obtain permission report from the Commissioner of Police/District Superintendent of Police where residence referred to in his or her application made. The court said that as per Regulation 638(ii)(b) the nature of the report which is required to be obtained and the issues that are required to be considered have not been clearly specified.The court said “In my considered opinion...be required for the Chief Superintendent/Superintendent of Prisons to clearly seek for certain information or report on the basis of each case, on each application on a case-to-case basis depending upon the nature of the offence and the punishment which has been imposed.” It said, “Whether the convicted were to be released on parole could harm the victim further or harm the witnesses and if there is any danger of even the convict would be harmed by the victim and or the family members. Apart from the above, unless the facts indicate otherwise, I do not see any other particular report which is required to be obtained in as much as the conduct of the convict in the prison would be certified by the prisoner office.” Noticing that in the present case, the report which has been received from the District Superintendent of Police does not in any manner indicate as to why a parole is required to be denied, except to state that the petitioner had been prosecuted for the offences indicated supra and convicted. The court said “Parole is applied for by only convicted prisoners, not by persons outside prison. Convicted prisoners are under trials, not by persons who have not been incarcerated. The report which has been furnished by the District Superintendent of Police therefore leave much to be desired inasmuch as, as indicated supra.” Following which it said “This probably has occurred on account of clause (c) of Roman (ii) of Regulation 638 being silent on the nature of the report which is required to be obtained.” Accordingly it directed “The Additional Chief Secretary of Home and the Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services are directed to look into this aspect and prepare suitable forms and carry out necessary training of all concerned in that regard. For the said purposes, they could engage the service of such competent and technical people as may be required.” The court said that due to "perfunctory reports" sought for by the Superintendent of Prisons and which are submitted through the District Superintendent of Police that normally applications for parole are rejected.The court then allowed the petition and the Chief Superintendent was directed to release the petitioner's son on parole for 30 days commencing from 18.10.2025. Appearance: Advocate Sirajuddin Ahmed for Petitioner.AGA Yashodha for R1, R2. Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 348Case Title: RADHAMMA AND State of Karnataka & Others Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 17723 OF 2025Click Here To Read/Download Order

Karnataka High Court Directs State To Digitise Parole Process, Build Online Dashboard For Tracking Applications

Mustafa Plumber

Tags