High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1854/2017

Sunil @ Lilly v. State Of NCT Of Delhi

2017-07-10Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~18 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1854/2017 SUNIL @ LILLY ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Puneet Garg, Adv.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Ms. Nandita Rao, ASC

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 10.07.2017 The petitioner had represented before the competent authority for being released on parole for sometime as some religious practice relating to the death of his mother was to be held on 12th July. The request has not yet been responded to.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to the report of the Doctor regarding his dental problem. The petitioner is suffering from restricted mouth opening and is required to undergo ultrasonic therapy, for which there is no provision in jail.

In any view of the matter taking into account the fact that the petitioner has to participate in the religious practice relating to the death of his mother, this Court is inclined to release the petitioner on parole for a period of one week to be counted from the date of his release. While granting the parole, this Court has taken the note of

the fact that the petitioner was recently released on furlough. However, the present order has been passed taking into account the necessity of the petitioner of attending the aforesaid ceremony. Let the petitioner be released on parole for a period of one week, to be counted from the date of his release, on his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction Superintendent of the concerned jail. The petitioner shall 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 JULY 10, 2017/ND/Bisht