High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1733/2015

Harender v. State

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

$~39 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1733/2015 HARENDER ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vikas Padora, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms. Nandita Rao, ASC for the State with Inspector Vijay Kumar, PS Vivek Vihar

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 14.08.2015 The prayer of the petitioner for being released on parole was primarily rejected by the competent authority on 6.5.2015 on the ground that requisite police verification regarding his address was not made. The petitioner has remained in jail for one year, 8 months and 28 days and the unexpired portion of sentence is only 10 months now. Ms. Nandita Rao, Additional standing Counsel files status report in Court. Let it be taken on record.

The status report affirms the residential address of the petitioner. The enquiry regarding the household of the petitioner also reveals that the

petitioner has two sons of young age who are living with the parents of the petitioner. The report further affirms that the house of the petitioner is in bad condition and requires urgent repairs.

Considering the fact that the conduct of the petitioner has been satisfactory in jail and that he is required to reconnect social ties, 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 two sureties 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 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