High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/481/2017

Vinod Kumar v. State

2017-05-09Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~27 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 481/2017 VINOD KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Ms. Sunita Arora, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through SI Ram Phal PS Vasant Vihar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 09.05.2017 The request of the petitioner to be released on furlough was rejected by the competent authority on 26.10.2016 citing unsatisfactory jail conduct of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the nominal roll and has pointed out that he has remained in jail for more than 14 years. It has also been pointed out that on several occasions, the competent authority had granted parole and furlough to the petitioner. Though on one occasion the petitioner jumped the parole but after his rearrest, he was again given the privilege of parole. However, taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner and the fact that the address of the petitioner has been verified (refer to the status report), this Court is inclined to grant furlough to the petitioner for a period of three weeks from the date of his release.

Let the petitioner be released on furlough for a period of three weeks, to be counted from the date of his release, on his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent of the concerned jail. The petitioner shall be required to follow the conditions listed below:- a) The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authorities on or before the expiry of the said period of parole. b) The petitioner shall not engage himself in any unlawful activity. c) The petitioner would not leave, under any circumstance, the National Capital Region of Delhi.

d) He shall furnish his and his surety's mobile telephone numbers to the SHO of the concerned police station so that in case of necessity he could be tracked and his whereabouts could be ascertained. In case, the petitioner flouts any one of the conditions, an application could be moved by the SHO for cancellation of his furlough and for taking of coercive steps for securing his attendance. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. The order be communicated to the Superintendent of the concerned jail for compliance and record.

Dasti.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J MAY 09, 2017/ab