← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1320/2017

Devender Singh @ Billoo v. State Of NCT Of Delhi

2017-05-30Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar3 pages

$~5 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1320/2017 DEVENDER SINGH @ BILLOO ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. M.L. Yadav, Adv.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC with Mr.

Siddarth Sindhu, Adv. for the State SI Harpal Singh, P.S. Paharganj

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 30.05.2017 The representation of the petitioner for being released on parole for reconnecting social ties was rejected by the competent authority by order dated 25.04.2017. What has weighed with the competent authority is the conduct of the petitioner in the past.

The petitioner was declared a bad character of the area and his name falls in BUNDLE 'A' of Prashant Vihar Police Station. He is also said to be involved in 11 other criminal cases. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this court to the nominal roll which indicates that out of a sentence of 5 years, which was awarded to him for his conviction under Sections 392, 394 and 120B of the IPC, he has undergone almost 90% of the conviction and would be released in less than 6 months. The petitioner was also granted parole twice by this court; first time on 18.06.2015 till 16.07.2015 and on the next occasion on 12.05.2016 to 09.06.2016.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that during the period of his custody, the petitioner has evinced absolutely satisfactory conduct. Whenever he was released on parole, he did not involve himself in any unlawful activity.

The factum of the petitioner's name being in BUNDLE 'A' of a particular police station was taken into consideration while he was released on parole on two other occasions. Mr. Lao, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that the address of the petitioner has been verified and has been found to be true. Taking into account the satisfactory conduct of the petitioner and the period of custody, this court is inclined to release the petitioner on parole for a period of three weeks.

Let the petitioner be released on parole for a period of three weeks, to be counted from the date of his release, on his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Superintendent of the concerned jail.

The petitioner shall be required to follow the conditions enumerated below:- a) The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authorities on or before the expiry of the said period of parole. b) The petitioner shall not engage himself in any unlawful activity. c) The petitioner would not leave, under any circumstance, the National Capital Territory of Delhi.

d) He shall furnish his and his surety's mobile telephone numbers to the SHO of the concerned police station so that in case of necessity he could be tracked and his whereabouts could be ascertained.

In case, the petitioner flouts any one of the conditions, an application could be moved by the SHO for cancellation of his parole and for taking of coercive steps for securing his attendance.

With these observations, the petition is disposed of. The order be communicated to the Superintendent of the concerned jail for compliance and record.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J MAY 30, 2017 ns