High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/2104/2017

Tilak Rathor v. State

2017-07-25Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~67 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2104/2017 TILAK RATHOR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Gaurav Bhattacharya, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms.Richa Kapoor, ASC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 25.07.2017 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 28.06.2017 passed by the competent authority whereby the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for being released on parole has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the nominal roll which indicates that the petitioner has been convicted under Section 498A/306 and 34 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for three years, to pay a fine of Rs.3000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further RI for 18 months. The petitioner has shown satisfactory conduct in jail. He has remained in custody for about two years two months and 14 days and the unexpired portion of sentence is only eight months.

Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, this Court feels inclined to release the petitioner on parole for the purposes of preferring SLP and also for re-establishing social ties for a specified period. Ms.Richa Kapoor, learned ASC on the strength of the status report submits that the address of the petitioner has been verified.

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 a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of 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.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J JULY 25, 2017/k