Pappu v. State

43#$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1950/2016 PAPPU ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Sumeet Verma and Mr.

Abhijeet Sharma, Advocates.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by:

Ms. Richa Kapoor, Additional Standing Counsel with SI Roshan Lal, PS Nangloi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 12.07.2016 Issue notice.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the State.

The parole application of the petitioner was dismissed by the State for the following reasons:

"the convict can harm the law & order in the society. The possibility of jumping the parole cannot be ruled out. Further, convict has last availed 05 weeks furlough during the year 2015 including last availed 03 weeks furlough upto 19.12.2015 by the order of DG (P)."

A perusal of the nominal roll of the petitioner reveals that the petitioner was awarded furlough thrice in the year 2015 and once in the year 2016 and every time he has been surrendering in time. Besides, the W.P.(CRL) 1950/2016

petitioner has been granted parole as well when he surrendered in time. Thus the order of the competent authority dismissing the parole on the ground that there is possibility of jumping the parole is erroneous and without any basis to this extent, as no material has been shown to this Court to base this apprehension of the State.

Be that as it may, the petitioner has already availed furlough thrice totalling to five weeks in the year 2015 and for two weeks in the year 2016. Thus I am not inclined to grant parole to the petitioner for the purpose of construction of new house or partition of the property. Petition is dismissed.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

JULY 12, 2016 'vn'

W.P.(CRL) 1950/2016