Virender @ Veeru v. State Of NCT Of Delhi

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2004/2018 VIRENDER @ VEERU ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Neha Kapoor, Advocate.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by:

Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC with Ms Hemlata Rawat and Mr.

Siddharth Sindhu, Advocates with Insp. Devendra Singh oberoi, PS Nangloi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 06.09.2018 1.

By this petition, the petitioner seeks parole on the ground that he has to look after his ailing mother and to find a suitable life partner for himself and also challenges the communication dated 9th May, 2018 informing the petitioner about the rejection of his application seeking parole on the ground of acquittal. The reason for rejection of the parole application was the unsatisfactory conduct of the petitioner in jail. 2.

On a notice being issued a status report has been filed. As per the status report the mother of the petitioner Smt. Dhaneshwari aged 65 years is a retired MCD employee though she is suffering from old age problems, however, no medical documents were produced except path lab tests and W.P.(CRL) 2004/2018

one OPD card from Santosh Hospital Ghaziabad. Besides the petitioner has two brothers, namely, Manoj and Sovinder who are both married and living with their children in the same house where the mother is residing. Thus the two brothers of the petitioner are capable of looking after the mother for ailments, if any.

3.

Petitioner has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and directed to undergo imprisonment for life. Besides the same the petitioner is undergoing trial in FIR No. 306/2013 under Sections 307/120B/323/147/148 IPC registered at PS Hari Nagar which the petitioner allegedly committed while in judicial custody. Further the conduct of the petitioner in the Jail is unsatisfactory and he was awarded punishment recently on 8th May, 2018 besides one each in the year 2016 and 2017. Earlier also when the petitioner was granted parole by this Court in the year 2016 the petitioner surrendered late by eleven days. 4.

Considering the conduct of the petitioner in jail wherein besides unsatisfactory behaviour he was also involved in FIR under Section 307 IPC, this Court finds no error in the communication dated 9th May, 2018 informing the rejection of the application for parole to the petitioner. 5.

Petition is dismissed.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

SEPTEMBER 06, 2018 'yo'

W.P.(CRL) 2004/2018