Santosh Singh @ Govinda v. State
$~7 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 2971/2019 and Crl. M.A. Nos. 38667/2019 and 38668/2019 SANTOSH SINGH @ GOVINDA ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr Aditya Wadhwa and Ms Harshitha Reddy, Advocates.
versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:
Mr Ranbir Singh Kundu, ASC (Criminal) for State with Mr Shivam Saharan, Advocate.
HC Satender, PS Sarai Rohilla.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
O R D E R
% 06.11.2019 1.
The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 30.08.2019 rejecting his application for the grant of parole. 2.
The plain reading of the impugned order indicates that the petitioner's application was rejected, as the petitioner had been awarded punishment for surrendering late on completion of the parole granted to him earlier. 3.
Admittedly, the petitioner was granted four weeks parole with effect from 19.11.2018, which expired on 17.12.2018. The petitioner had surrendered on 20.12.2018 in an intoxicated condition. The petitioner was also awarded punishment for the said misconduct. 4.
In terms of Rule 1210(II) of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, the conduct
of the prisoner is required to be good during the last one year for being considered for parole. In terms of Rule 1210(IV) of the aforesaid Rules, the convict should not have violated any terms and conditions of the parole or furlough granted earlier. Thus, indisputably, the petitioner is not entitled to parole.
5.
In view of the above, the impugned order cannot be faulted. However, it is seen that one year from the date of the said misconduct would expire on 20.12.2019.
6.
In view of the above, it is directed that if the petitioner files a fresh application, the same would be considered by the authorities for grant of parole after 20.12.2019.
7.
The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. The pending applications are also disposed of.
8.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent. VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 06, 2019 RK