Subhash Chander v. State
$~34.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 400/2017 SUBHASH CHANDER ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr. Rajeev Sirohi, Advocate.
versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:
Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC and Mr.Peeyush Bhatia, Advocate for the State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
O R D E R
% 09.02.2017 Mr. Mahajan has tendered in Court a status report, which is taken on record. Mr. Mahajan states that a fresh medical report shall be placed on record during the course of the day. Let the same be done. In terms of the last order, a medical report has also been placed on record by the Medical Officer in-charge, Central Jail Dispensary (8/9), Tihar, New Delhi. This Court has specifically required a report to be furnished as to whether the petitioner is at any immediate risk of catching an infection on account of surgery undergone by him. On this aspect, though the medical report is silent, Mr. Mahajan, on
instructions, states that the doctor has opined that the petitioner is at a higher risk of contacting an infection than a normal person. This being the position, the prayer made by the petitioner to seek parole on medical grounds is justified. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of eight weeks subject to: i) his furnishing personal bond with one surety in the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent; ii) 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;
iii) 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; iv) he shall duly surrender at the end of the period of parole; and v) he shall also not indulge in any criminal activity while on parole. The order be communicated to the Jail Superintendent. Dasti.
VIPIN SANGHI, J FEBRUARY 09, 2017 B.S. Rohella