Alam @ Mamoon v. State

$~32 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 718/2018 ALAM @ MAMOON ..... Petitioner Through :

Mr.Sumit Choudhary, Advocate with Mr.Kanwar Kochhar, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through :

Mr.Ashish Negi, Proxy counsel.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG

O R D E R

% 08.03.2018 CRL.M.A.No.4352/2018 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 718/2018 1.

The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for seeking furlough for a period of three weeks. Status report not filed.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have examined the file. From perusal of the nominal roll, it reveals that the petitioner was convicted under Sections 396 IPC read with Section 397 IPC and was sentenced to undergo RI for life with fine `2,000/-.

Crl.A.852/2009 was dismissed by this Court on 27.01.2012. Nominal Roll further reveals that only with effect from 08.11.2017 to 07.12.2017 the petitioner was granted four weeks parole by this Court. Since the petitioner has availed parole for four weeks recently, no sufficient ground exists to grant release on furlough for three weeks more at this stage.

3.

The grant of parole / furlough should not be a regular feature. The request for grant of furlough was rejected by the competent authority on 31.01.2018.

Apparently, the petitioner had filed the application for seeking furlough soon after availing parole. 4.

The writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to seek parole / furlough as per rules / guidelines at an appropriate stage.

S.P.GARG, J MARCH 08, 2018 / tr