Arif v. State

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 21/2018 ARIF ..... Petitioner Through:

Ms Prabha Mishra and Mr Imran Khan, Advs versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms Jyoti Babbar, Adv for Mr Rajesh Mahajan, Adv for state

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 31.01.2018 Petitioner is seeking parole for the reasons mentioned in the application. His application has been rejected by the competent authority on 13.11.2017 on the ground that he had not completed one year of the mandatory sentence which is required before an application for parole can be considered. The nominal roll of the petitioner reflects that as on date he has undergone incarceration of about 1 year and 5 months which includes the remissions earned by him. His conviction had been altered by this court from conviction under section 376(2)(i) of the IPC to section 376 r/w S. 511 IPC and the substantive sentence of 10 years awarded to the convict was reduced to 5 years besides fine. The jail conduct of the petitioner is satisfactory who is working as 'sahayak' in stitching unit. This court

deems it fit to grant parole to the petitioner. Petitioner is admitted to parole for a period of four weeks to be counted from the date of his release on furnishing of his personal bond in the sum of Rs 10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Jail Superintendent with condition that he shall appear before the concerned SHO on every Monday of every week. He shall also furnish his latest residential address and mobile number to the concerned investigating officer.

Petition disposed of in the above terms.

A copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendant concerned for intimation to the petitioner.

INDERMEET KAUR, J JANUARY 31, 2018 SU