High Court of Gujarat

BISVAJIT @ BISU NANIGOPAL SINGAROY (BRAHMAN)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal: 35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE
Bench: M R MENGDEY

Holding

The Court held that the State must reconsider the remission application within four months, and the petitioner is to be released on parole leave for three months pending that decision.

Summary

Bisvajit @ Bisu Nanigopal Singaroy, after serving more than 22 years of imprisonment, applied for remission which was rejected by the State Government on the ground of seriousness of the offence. He challenged the rejection through a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court observed that, given the length of incarceration, the State must reconsider the remission request in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Navas @ Mulanavas v. State of Kerala (2024 INSC 215). The Court directed the State to revisit the matter within four months and, in the meantime, ordered the petitioner’s release on parole leave for three months or until a fresh decision is made. The petition was disposed and the rule made absolute.

Issues considered

Whether the State Government’s refusal to grant remission after 22 years of imprisonment is legally valid.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to parole leave pending reconsideration of the remission application.
Whether the State must reconsider the remission application in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Navas @ Mulanavas v. State of Kerala.

Subjects

remissionparoleArticle 226high courtcriminal applicationlong incarcerationSupreme Court precedent

Judgment

      R/SCR.A/1663/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 28/04/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 1663 of 2026

                                 With
       CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (PAROLE LEAVE) NO. 1 of 2026
          In R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1663 of 2026
==========================================================
            BISVAJIT @ BISU NANIGOPAL SINGAROY (BRAHMAN)
                                 Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
BHAVIN B THAKAR(9371) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MR. MEET THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY

                                Date : 28/04/2026

                                     ORDER


     ORDER IN R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION)
                        NO. 1663 of 2026: -


1.      Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent –
State. By consent, rule is fixed forthwith.


2.      By filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.12.2025 passed by the
State Government in Home Department whereby the case of the petitioner for
grant of remission has been dismissed.


3.      From the Jail remarks produced on record, it appears that the petitioner
had undergone incarceration for a period of more than 22 years. Moreover, the
reasons given by the concerned authority for rejecting the case of the petitioner


                                     Page 1 of 2
       R/SCR.A/1663/2026                                                    ORDER DATED: 28/04/2026




 for grant of remission, is mainly on the basis of seriousness of the offence for
 which he has been convicted. The petitioner has already undergone
 incarceration for a period of 22 years for the offence for which he has
 convicted. Having regard to these aspects, the State authorities shall reconsider
 the case of the petitioner for grant of remission in view of the judgment of the
 Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Navas @ Mulanavas Versus State of Kerala
 reported in 2024 INSC 215. Such an exercise carried out by the State authority
 within period of 4 (Four) months from the date of the receipt of the present
 order. With these observations, the present petition is disposed of. Rule is made
 absolute to the aforesaid extent.

    ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (PAROLE LEAVE)
                         NO.1 of 2026
      In R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1663 of 2026




          Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has undergone incarceration
 for a period of more than 22 years, he is ordered to be released on Parole Leave
 upon usual terms and conditions for a period of 3 (Three) months or till the
 date on which the fresh decision is taken by the State authorities, whichever is
 earlier. With these observations, the present criminal misc. application stands
 disposed of.


          Direcrt service is permitted.



                                                                                 (M. R. MENGDEY,J)
 RAVI OZA

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RAVI OZA(HCW0111), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 29/04/2026 10:26:42




                                                 Page 2 of 2

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "remission"Sign in to search