Neeraj Pal v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi

$~48 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2216/2017 NEERAJ PAL ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Dhan Mohan with Ms. Tanu B.

Mishra, Advs.

versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC with Mr.

Lokesh Chandra, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 30.10.2017 The request of the petitioner for being released on parole has been rejected by the competent authority vide order dated 17.04.2017. The competent authority is of the view that adverse effect on law and order situation would be created in the area in case of release of the petitioner on parole.

The 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 4 years and has displayed satisfactory conduct in jail. The address of the petitioner has also been verified and has been found to be existing.

Mr. Rajesh Mahajan has however, submitted that the petitioner has been convicted in another case under Section 308 of the IPC and the sentence imposed upon him in that case has not commenced as yet. Be that as it may, taking into account the fact that the petitioner is

required to file SLP before the Supreme Court of India, this court is inclined to grant parole to the petitioner for a specific period of four weeks. While saying so this court has taken note of the fact that the petitioner has shown satisfactory conduct in jail.

The petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of four weeks, to be counted from the date of his release, subject to his furnishing 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, however, abide by the conditions listed below:- i) The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authorities on or before the end of the said period of parole.

j) The petitioner shall not engage himself in any unlawful activity. k) The petitioner would not leave the National Capital Region of Delhi, without intimating the officer-in-charge of the concerned police station.

l) He shall furnish his and his surety's 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.

OCTOBER 30, 2017/ns ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J