Pramod Kumar v. State

$~36.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2744/2016 PRAMOD KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Suraj Rathi, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms. Mallika Parmar, Advocate for Ms.Richa Kapoor, ASC along with SI Sumer Chand, PS-Nabi Karim, for the State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

O R D E R

% 20.09.2016 Crl. M.A. No. 14614/2016 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 2744/2016 The petitioner has preferred the present petition to seek parole for a period of three months to enable him to file Special Leave Petition. The application of the petitioner made to the Government has been rejected on 01.09.2016 on account of adverse police report, which states that the petitioner is not residing at the given address. The petitioner has been

convicted of the offence under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of seven years. The petitioner, as per his own showing, has undergone incarceration of about three years. The appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 17.05.2016 upholding the conviction and sentence awarded to him by the Trial Court. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant parole to the petitioner. The petitioner can always prefer a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court through jail. In case he wishes to engage a private counsel, the counsel shall be provided access to the petitioner for receiving instructions as per the Jail Manual.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. VIPIN SANGHI, J SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 B.S. Rohella