Ram Shakal @ Pappu v. State

$~11 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1342/2015 RAM SHAKAL @ PAPPU ..... Petitioner Through:Mr.Ajit Sharma with Mr.Mayank Aggarwal, Advocates.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC with Mr.Srilina Roy, Advocate.

S.I.Arun Kumar, P.S. Anand Vihar

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 04.09.2015 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 8.5.2015 passed by the competent authority whereby his prayer for being released on parole for filing SLP against the said order and also for maintaining social ties, has been rejected.

With reference to the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the primary reason for rejecting his prayer is non-verification of his residential address at Sultanpur in the State of U.P.

Status report which has been filed during the course of the hearing of this petition indicates that the place of residence of the petitioner has been confirmed.

It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that he has remained in custody for 7 years and 2 months by now and his overall conduct in

jail has been satisfactory.

Since the petitioner is required to file SLP against the impugned judgment, this Court is inclined to release him for a specified period on parole.

The petitioner shall be released on parole for a period of 30 days from the date of the release, on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- with one surety of the like amount 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) The petitioner shall not, without intimation to the SHO of the concerned Police Station, leave the territorial confines of the Delhi.

d) Immediately after his release, the petitioner shall furnish his mobile telephone number and the mobile telephone number of his surety to the SHO of the concerned police station so that in case of necessity he could be tracked and his whereabouts could be ascertained.

e) In case the petitioner visits his home town, he shall, within a period of 24 hours of his reaching there, inform the SHO of the police station under whose territorial jurisdiction his house is situated, about his arrival and his tentative period of stay.

For the period that he will be in his home

town, i.e., in U.P., he shall get his presence marked before the concerned police station once in a week.

In case, the petitioner flouts any one of the conditions, the SHO concerned will be at liberty to take necessary action for cancellation of parole and will thereafter take 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. ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J SEPTEMBER 04, 2015 Bisht