High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/2562/2015

Rajawati v. State

2016-01-07Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~8 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2562/2015 RAJAWATI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC with Mr.Siddharth Sindhu, Adv.

SI Gaurav Singh, P.S. Gokal Puri

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 07.01.2016 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18.08.2015 passed by the competent authority whereby her prayer for being released on parole for filing SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and for reconnecting social ties has been rejected.

The competent authority has taken into account the adverse Police report regarding maintenance of law and order for rejecting the prayer of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has remained in custody for about 8 years by now and her conduct in jail has been satisfactory.

Every citizen/convict has a right to avail all the statutory legal remedies and one cannot be prevented from doing so. The status report reflects that the petitioner has home and hearth and therefore there is not even a remote possibility of the petitioner jumping the parole bond.

Considering the aforesaid facts, the petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of 30 days from the date of her release, on the petitioner furnishing a 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, 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 herself in any unlawful activity. c) If the petitioner is required to go out of the territory of Delhi, she would intimate about her visit to the SHO of the concerned police station.

d) She shall furnish her 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 she could be tracked and her 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 her parole and for taking of the coercive steps for securing her 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. Dasti.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J JANUARY 07, 2016 ns