High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1870/2017

Bhutana v. State

2017-11-02Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~34 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1870/2017 BHUTANA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Sumeet Verma, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC.

ASI Subhash, P.S.Ashok Vihar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 02.11.2017 The request of the petitioner for being released on parole for reestablishing social ties and for looking after his aged parents has been rejected by the competent authority vide order dated 31.05.2017 as the address and grounds urged by the petitioner could not be verified by the police due to incorrect address having been provided by the petitioner in the application.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has, however, stated that some other address was verified and so it was not found to be correct. Now the correct address has been verified and has been found to be existing. The petitioner has remained in jail for more than eight years by now and but for one punishment which was given to him on 19.03.2015,the petitioner has displayed satisfactory conduct in jail. It has also been communicated to this Court that never in the past, the petitioner was given any parole.

Taking into account the period of confinement of the petitioner in jail and his having shown satisfactory conduct for the last three years, this Court is inclined to grant parole to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of four weeks, to be counted from the date of his release, on his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Superintendent of the concerned jail.

The petitioner shall, however, abide by the conditions listed 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 Region of Delhi, without intimating the officerin-charge of the concerned police station. d) He shall furnish his and his sureties' 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 NOVEMBER 02, 2017/k