Kailash Chand v. State

$~32.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 622/2017 KAILASH CHAND ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sumer Kumar Sethi, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocate for Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel along with SI Rajpal Singh, PSAnand Vihar, for the State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

O R D E R

% 28.02.2017 The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to seek parole on two grounds. Firstly, the petitioner states that his sister has to get married on 27.02.2017. I may observe that the said marriage is already over. The second ground taken by the petitioner is that he has to attend to his house, which has suffered damage.

Mr. Akhtar, who accepts notice, has tendered a status report, which is taken on record. As per the status report, the condition of the house is good. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to parole to re-connect his social ties. The nominal roll shows that

the petitioner has been released on furlough on three occasions in 2016, including between 21.10.2016 to 04.11.2016 for a period of two weeks. In these circumstances, even this requirement has been met. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. As and when the occasion arises, the petitioner may apply for parole again. VIPIN SANGHI, J FEBRUARY 28, 2017 B.S. Rohella