Illyasuddin v. State

$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 31/2016 ILLYASUDDIN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocate for Mr.

Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Criminal) and SI Madan Meena, PSKapasehra

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

O R D E R

% 21.03.2016 The present petition seeking parole is devoid of merit, inasmuch as, the conduct of the petitioner has been unsatisfactory leading to the award of punishment on 22.05.2016. Even otherwise, the ground taken by the petitioner to the effect that he wishes to institute a Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India is untenable since he has failed to provide a local address which would be a necessary concomitant for him to prosecute proceedings before a higher court. I must also observe that the order impugned in the present petition was rendered as far back as on 10.07.2016. In view of the assertion made on behalf of Mr. Yadav that the petitioner is impecunious, the legal aid is directed to provide assistance to the petitioner in the event he wishes to institute a Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. A copy of this order be sent to the Suprintendent, Central Jail, Tihar to be communicated to the petitioner.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J MARCH 21, 2016 dn