High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1441/2015

Bharat @ Chunmun v. State

2015-08-20Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar3 pages

$~22 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1441/2015 BHARAT @ CHUNMUN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Ankur Sood and Mr.Shoumendu Mukherji, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for the State with SI Ombir Singh, PS Welcome.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 20.08.2015 The petitioner prays for being released on parole. The petitioner prayed before the competent authority for his being released on parole for filing SLP in the Supreme Court of India as also to reconnect social ties. Such a prayer was rejected on 3.6.2015 for the reason that there was an adverse police report against him. There was an apprehension that his release would impact the even tempo of life in the society. The other ground which weighed with the competent authority was that the petitioner had returned to jail only in the month of January, 2015. He was granted interim bail but he surrendered later than the due date. The nominal roll further discloses that his overall conduct in jail was not satisfactory as he was punished on 30.4.2013. However, after the

punishment in 2013, his conduct in jail for last one year is stated to be satisfactory.

The status report affirms the address of the petitioner. A convict/petitioner cannot be prevented from availing his legal remedies. Considering the fact that the petitioner is required to file SLP before Supreme Court of India, this Court is inclined to release him on parole for a specified period.

The petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of 30 days from the date of his release subject to the petitioner furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of 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) 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 the 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.

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 the 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 AUGUST 20, 2015 ns