Raju v. State

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 826/2018 & Crl. M.A. No.5192/2018 RAJU ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Zeeshan Hashmi, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC with Mr.

Siddharth Sindhu, Adv for the State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 20.03.2018 The petitioner is seeking furlough for the reasons mentioned in the petition. His application seeking furlough had been declined by the Competent Authority. This was for the reason that he did not have a good conduct; he had in fact jumped the furlough which had been granted to him earlier.

On advance notice, learned counsel for the state has put in appearance. His submission is that the Guidelines of the NCT of Delhi for parole and furlough would not permit such an applicant to be considered. He must have a continuous good conduct for the last three preceding years which is not so in the instant case. At this stage, learned counsel for the wants to withdraw this petition. He seeks liberty of this Court to move a better petition after consulting his client.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

A copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendent for intimation to the petitioner.

INDERMEET KAUR, J MARCH 20, 2018