Rajeev Kumar v. State

$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 32/2020 RAJEEV KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Dhruv Gupta & Mr. Harshil Gupta, Advocates

Versus

STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Sanjay Lao, Additional Standing Counsel with Inspector Usha Sharma

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI

O R D E R

% 08.01.2020 Petitioner has been granted first spell of furlough for three weeks vide order of 28th June, 2019 of the competent authority on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with two surety bonds in the like amount. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is unable to take benefit of order of 28th June, 2019 of the competent authority because he is unable to furnish surety and is, therefore, praying that he be released on his furnishing cash surety.

Notice.

Mr. Sanjay Lao, Additional Standing Counsel, for respondent/State accepts notice.

W.P.(CRL) 32/20

Heard.

Petitioner is facing sentence for committing offence under Section 302 IPC, in FIR No. 256/2010, registered at police station North Rohini, Delhi. Vide order of 28th June, 2019 of the competent authority. Petitioner was granted first spell of furlough for three weeks on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with two surety bonds in the like amount. On petitioner's request, vide order of 20th August, 2019, the competent authority modified its order dated 28th June, 2019 to the extent that petitioner was permitted to furnish one security in lieu of two sureties. Thereafter, another application of petitioner seeking permission to furnish cash surety instead of one surety was dismissed by the competent authority on 25th October, 2019, against which petitioner has filed this petition.

Upon hearing both the sides, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of 25th October, 2019 of the competent authority. The petition is dismissed.

BRIJESH SETHI, J JANUARY 08, 2020 r W.P.(CRL) 32/20