Rajesh @ Nauaa v. State

$~17 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1440/2015 RAJESH @ NAUAA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Adv.

(DHCLSC) versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC for the State with SI Abhishek Kumar, PS Prasad Nagar

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 01.09.2015 The petitioner questions the order dated 8.5.2015 passed by the competent authority whereby his prayer to be released on parole for reconnecting social ties and searching suitable match for self marriage and settling in life, has been rejected.

From the perusal of the order referred to above, it would appear that the prayer was declined because there was an adverse police report about the petitioner being a bad character of the area. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has remained in jail for about 9 years and 11 months by now and his overall conduct in jail has been satisfactory.

It is further pointed out that the petitioner was released on parole twice during his custody period; once in the year 2001 and the other

in the year 2014, and on both occasions, no untoward incident was reported. Mr. Sanjay Lao, Additional Standing counsel has filed the status report during the hearing of this petition and the same has been taken on record. With reference to the status report, Mr. Lao submits that the address of the petitioner has been verified.

There does not appear to be any plausible reason for submitting adverse report about his creating law and order problem in case he is let out from jail for a specified period.

Considering the aforementioned facts, 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 SEPTEMBER 01, 2015 ns