← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1718/2015

Nadeem v. State

2015-08-14Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar3 pages

$~35 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1718/2015 NADEEM ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Adv.

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

Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC for the State with SI Kapil Kumar, PS GTB Enclave

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 14.08.2015 The prayer of the petitioner for release on parole for attending to his old and ailing parents, arranging finances for his family and for reconnecting social ties with the society, has been rejected by the competent authority on 10.7.2015.

The nominal roll of the petitioner suggests that he has remained in custody for 5 years, 8 months and 13 days and the unexpired portion of the sentence is only 5 months and some days.

The overall conduct of the petitioner in jail has been satisfactory. On earlier occasion also, the petitioner was released on parole and he surrendered before the jail authorities on time.

Mr. Sanjay Lao, Additional Standing Counsel files the status report during

hearing of this petition.

Let it be taken on record.

The status report affirms the residential address of the petitioner. However, an apprehension has been put forth in the status report regarding the possibility of the petitioner jumping the parole. No definite material has been relied upon by the State for coming to this conclusion. The overall conduct of the petitioner in jail has been satisfactory. Let the petitioner 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 two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:- q) The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authorities on or before the expiry of the said period of parole. r) The petitioner shall not engage himself in any unlawful activity. s) 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.

t) He shall furnish his mobile telephone number and the mobile telephone number of both the sureties 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 14, 2015 ns