High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/2085/2015

Sunil Kumar v. State

2015-09-21Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~49 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2085/2015 SUNIL KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Imran Khan, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for the State SI Bijender Singh, P.S. Karol Bagh

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 21.09.2015 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 3.8.2015 whereby his prayer for release on parole for filing SLP before the Supreme Court and reconnecting social ties has been rejected.

The competent authority was of the view that the SLP could be filed from the jail where free legal aid is available and if need be the petitioner could have applied for furlough to the competent authority. A reference to the nominal roll of the petitioner reveals that the conduct of the petitioner in jail has been satisfactory. A person cannot be prevented from pursuing his legal remedy.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date SLP could not be filed because of his not being released on parole. Considering the aforementioned fact, the petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of 30 days from the date of his release on his

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 21, 2015 ns