Kartik Subramaniam v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR

$~14 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2646/2015, CRL.M.A.Nos.3369/16, 3370/16, 10547/16, & 16774/15 KARTIK SUBRAMANIAM ..... Petitioner Through :

Ms. Warsha Farasat, Advocate.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through :

Mr.Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC.

Ms.Richa Kapoor, ASC with Mr.Ashish Negi, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG

O R D E R

% 13.02.2018 1.

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner urged to grant one month parole to the petitioner to enable him to get treatment for his ailing father.

2.

Perusal of the file reveals that the petitioner is on parole since 2016. It has been extended from time to time to enable the petitioner to take care of his father.

3.

In the interest of justice and considering the medical condition of the petitioner's father, he is permitted to surrender on 14.03.2018. He assures that no further extension shall be sought. 4.

Union of India has already filed its affidavit in terms of the previous orders. It is informed by the learned counsel for Union of India that it did not find any mitigating / special circumstances cited

either by Delhi Government or the recommendation of the Sentence Reviewing Board warranting pre-mature release of the petitioner. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner informs that recently the petitioner has filed another representation dated 09.02.2018 on the basis of certain information obtained through RTI. She further informs that the said representation for pre-mature release has not been disposed of.

6.

Learned counsel for Union of India states that the representation (if any) made by the petitioner shall be considered on merits and it be disposed of within a reasonable period. 7.

The petitioner shall file the necessary documents before the Union of India and supply its copies to the learned counsel for the respondent.

8.

Representation (if any) filed by the petitioner shall be considered on merits at the earliest.

9.

In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition. 10.

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the above observations.

11.

Pending applications also stand disposed of.

12.

Order 'dasti.'

S.P.GARG, J.

FEBRUARY 13, 2018 / tr