High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1880/2017

Sarfaraz v. State

2017-08-21Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~41 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1880/2017 SARFARAZ ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Anwesh Madhukar, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Dr.M.P.Singh, APP.

SI Nikhil Singh, P.S.Kanjhawala.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 21.08.2017 The competent authority has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for being released on parole vide order 29.05.2017 on the ground that there was an apprehension that the petitioner may harm the victim party and may also disturb the law and order situation.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the nominal roll which indicates that the petitioner has remained in jail for about six years by now. His conduct in jail has been satisfactory. On an earlier occasion, the petitioner was released on furlough and no adverse report regarding the conduct of the petitioner came forthcoming during the period when he was on furlough. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the Superintendent of the concerned jail has also recommended for his release on parole in view of his good conduct in jail.

Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, especially the overall

jail conduct being satisfactory, this Court is inclined to release the petitioner on parole for a specified period.

Let the petitioner be released on parole for a period of three weeks, to be counted from the date of his release, on his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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.

Dasti.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J AUGUST 21, 2017/k