Billo v. State

$~53 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 3273/2019 BILLO ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Samyak Gangwal, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Karan Jeet Rai Sharma, Advocate for Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC.

SI Manish Kumar, PS Jagat Puri.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 25.11.2019 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 21.10.2019 passed by the competent authority rejecting the petitioner's application for parole.

2.

A plain reading of the said order indicates that parole was rejected on three grounds. First, on account of an adverse police report indicating that the petitioner has not been residing at the address provided since the last few years.

Second, if parole is granted, it will affect public peace and tranquillity.

The police report also indicates that there may be adverse impact on law and order if the petitioner is released and he may cause harm to the victims. Third, no compelling grounds for grant of parole are made out.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the State has also handed over a

statement made by the petitioner's wife and his daughter, objecting to the petitioner being released on parole and expressing their apprehension regarding the danger to their lives. The status report filed also indicates that the family members of the petitioner are objecting to the grant of parole. 4.

The petitioner's wife and daughter are not residing at the address as indicated by the petitioner. However, the import of the police report is that the address is not the petitioner's residence. On the other hand, the petitioner insists that the address provided is that of his ancestral house and he is entitled to reside at the premises. This Court is not called upon to decide the said controversy in this petition; suffice it to state that the address verification has yielded negative results.

5.

In view of the above, this Court does not find any infirmity with the impugned order.

6.

Accordingly, the petition is rejected.

The petitioner is at liberty to apply for a fresh parole after providing a fresh address and ascertaining that the residents of the said address do not have any objection to housing the petitioner during the term of his parole.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 25, 2019 DR