Kishore Kumar v. State

$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 25/2016 KISHORE KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC (Crl.) SI Mukesh Kumar, PS Civil Lines

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

O R D E R

% 15.03.2016 The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the competent authority to enlarge the petitioner on parole purportedly on the grounds of "urgent medical treatment/operation for knee ailment to his ailing mother as she is suffering from arthritis". The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 23rd November, 2015 whereby his representation for parole on the above grounds was rejected by the competent authority for the following reasons:- "rejected in view of adverse police report which states that the possibility of adverse impact on law and order and the security in the area cannot be ruled out on account of the proposed release of the convict on parole. The convict may harm the victim and witnesses. Further, as per nominal roll convict is also involved in 6 other criminal cases. The convict last availed 01 month parole upto 22.01.2015 by the order of DHC."

A status report has been filed on behalf of the official respondent. The same is taken on record.

A perusal of the status report reveals that the grounds taken by the petitioner in his representation seeking parole are without any foundation and

patently false.

Although the mother of the petitioner is suffering from arthritis, she is receiving treatment at the Babu Jagjeevan Ram Hospital, Jahangir Puri, Delhi as an out-patient. This Court cannot countenance the relief being sought under the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of the High Court on false and frivolous pretext. The petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J MARCH 15, 2016 sd