Amar v. State

$~6.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 293/2017 AMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Dinesh Malik, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

O R D E R

% 27.03.2017 In this case, the petitioner sought parole on the ground that his wife was suffering from ailments and that he needed to attend to her. The status report shows that the wife of the petitioner did not provide any document to substantiate her ailment or treatment. She states that she shall provide the same at later stage.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to parole even for the purpose of re-establishing his social ties. The nominal roll shows that the petitioner was earlier released on parole between 25.02.2016 to 24.03.2016 by this Court. It is not reported that he has misused the said parole granted to him.

In these circumstances, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is

directed to be released on parole for a period of four weeks upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent. This is further subject to the condition that;

i) he shall provide his mobile phone number to the Jail Superintendent at the time of his release, which shall be kept in working condition at all times. The same shall not be changed without prior intimation to the Jail Superintendent;

ii) he shall report at the local police station to mark his attendance on every Monday at 11:00 a.m. during the period of parole; iii) he shall duly surrender at the end of the period of parole; and iv) he shall also not indulge in any criminal activity while on parole. The order be communicated to the petitioner through Jail Superintendent.

The petition stands disposed of. Dasti.

VIPIN SANGHI, J MARCH 27, 2017 sl