Mohd. Sadiq v. State

$~16 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1295/2015 MOHD. SADIQ ..... Petitioner Through:

Mohd. Faraz, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Rahul Mehra with Mr.Amrit Singh, Advs. for State.

SI Surtanand, PS Chandni Mahal, Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 12.08.2015 The petitioner seeks release on parole for making arrangements for filing SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme court of India as also for connecting social ties. His payer for such release on parole which was preferred on 21.02.2015 has not yet been responded to by the Competent Authority.

Status Report has been filed which confirms the address of the petitioner.

Since the petitioner was alleged to have killed one of his own brothers, this court had directed the State to find out and verify as to how is the relationship of the petitioner with his other brothers. It had been submitted by the petitioner that his brothers live in the same vicinity where the petitioner has his own house. Pursuant to such an order, a further verification was made by

the State and the Status Report which has been filed on 10.08.2015 affirms that the relationship of the petitioner with his other brothers are cordial.

A look at the nominal roll of the petitioner discloses that his conduct in jail has been satisfactory throughout. Let the petitioner be released on parole for a period of 30 days from the date of his release on his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:- 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) If the petitioner is required to go out of the territory of Delhi, he would intimate about his visit to the SHO of the concerned police station.

d) He shall furnish his mobile telephone number and the mobile telephone number of both the sureties 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.

A copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of the concerned Jail for information and compliance. Dasti.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J AUGUST 12, 2015 neelam