Rishi Pal v. State

$~30 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2054/2019 RISHI PAL ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Sunil Sharma, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Mr Tushar Sharma, Mr Saurabh Sharma and Mr A.

Kaushik, Advocates.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Jamal Akhtar, Mr Amanpreet Singh and Mr Rahul Mehra, Advocates for State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 05.11.2019 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 11.06.2019 rejecting the petitioner's request for furlough. 2.

One of the principal reasons for rejecting the petitioner's application was the opposition by his wife. She had complained that whenever the petitioner is released from custody, he assaults her and her two children and therefore, she did not want him to be released from custody. In view of this opposition by the petitioner's wife, the petitioner stated that he would reside at a separate place. However, the petitioner has been unable to arrange the same.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that he wishes to resolve his differences with his wife and therefore, ought to be released on furlough. This Court is not persuaded to accept the same. It will always

be open for the petitioner to resolve his differences with his wife and mend his ways. However, in view of the current opposition by her, this Court does not consider it apposite to allow the present petition as the same would result in the petitioner residing at the same premises as his wife and this may lead to an untoward incident.

4.

The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

5.

Needless to state that the petitioner would be at liberty to apply afresh after resolving all his differences with his wife or arranging a separate place to stay on his release.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 05, 2019 RK