Badku v. State

6# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3205/2016 BADKU ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Krishan Kumar, Advocate.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by:

Ms. Nandita Rao, Additional Standing Counsel for the State with SI Rajesh Kumar, PS Begumpur.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 28.03.2017 1.

By the present petition the petitioner seeks parole on the ground that he has to file Special Leave Petition.

2.

As per the status report filed, the address of one Manoj filed in the parole application was found to be genuine however, Manoj stated that he had no control over the petitioner.

3.

By a subsequent status report dated 6th March, 2017 the State has verified that the family of the petitioner, comprising of his wife and three children, is residing at Village Udanpur, PS Gadora, Tehsil Kalsi, District Jalond, U.P. however, it is not apparent that there is no one to stand surety for the petitioner. Moreover a perusal of the nominal role reveals that period of 8 months imprisonment excluding remissions remains to be undergone by the petitioner before he is released.

W.P.(CRL) 3205/2016

4.

Considering the fact that the petitioner can file the Special leave Petition from the Jail through legal aid counsel, this court finds no reason to disagree with the order passed by the Competent Authority rejecting parole of the petitioner.

5.

Petition is dismissed.

6.

Copy of the order be communicated to the petitioner through Superintendent, Tihar Jail.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

MARCH 28, 2017 'vn'

W.P.(CRL) 3205/2016