Yogesh Sharma @ Rahul Sharma v. State

$~3 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 3328/2019 YOGESH SHARMA @ RAHUL SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Counsel (appearance not given) versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 13.01.2020 Crl. M.A. No.41341/2019 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application is disposed of.

W.P(Crl.) No.3328/2019 3.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 21.10.2019, whereby the petitioner's application for parole had been rejected.

A plain reading of the impugned order indicates that the petitioner's application was rejected in view of Rule 1210(II) and 1271(b) (II) of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018.

4.

In terms of Rule 1210 (II) of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, the convict would be entitled to parole if his conduct has been uniformly good for the last two years given that he has been awarded a major punishment. In this

case, the petitioner was awarded a major punishment on 01.03.2018 and, therefore, his application for parole can only be considered after he has maintained good conduct for a period of two years, thereafter. 5.

In view of the above, this Court finds no infirmity with the impugned order.

6.

The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J JANUARY 13, 2020 DR