NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

W.P.(CRL)/1795/2017 of VIJAY @ RAJESH Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2017-07-20
Bench
THENATIONAL CAPITAL REGION OF DELHI
Case number
594/2016

Parties

Cites (1)

Statutes cited (1)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all BodyHeader

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(CRL) 1795/2017

VIJAY @ RAJESH

..... Petitioner

ThroughMs.Neha Kapoor, Adv.

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI..... Respondent

ThroughMr.R.S. Kundu, ASC withMr.Peeyush Bhatia, Adv. for state.SI Manish Tyagi PS Anand Parbat.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMARO R R%20.07.2017

The petitioner had approached the competent authority for beingreleased on parole for the purposes of providing assistance to his wife who isin urgent need of treatment on account of multiple cysts in her breast andpus accumulation. The request of the petitioner was not acceded to, makingit incumbent upon the petitioner to approach this Court.

However, during the pendency of the present writ petition, thecompetent authority rejected the prayer of the petitioner on 19.07.2017. Theorder has been brought on record by Mr.R.S. Kundu, ASC. It appears thatthe request of the petitioner was turned down on the ground that thepetitioner was involved in two other cases namely FIR No.379/2004 andFIR No.312/2008.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this

Court to the nominal roll which indicates that the petitioner is convictunder sections 302/392/394/397 of the IPC and has been sentenced toundergo RI for life. The petitioner has remained in jail for about 13 years bynow and his conduct in jail has been satisfactory.

The petitioner was earlier released on parole and furlough by thecompetent authority on number of occasions. However, the nominal rollfurther indicates that the petitioner was rearrested in another caseNo.594/2016 which was lodged under section 307/353/186 of the IPC on21.08.2016, during the period that the petitioner was out on furlough.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought on record copy of theFIR referred to above and the order granting bail to the petitioner in theaforesaid case. He has also submitted that in other two cases, about whichreference has been made in the nominal roll, the petitioner is on bail.

The status report indicates that the assertion of the petitioner that hiswife, during her post pregnancy period has developed complications andmultiple cysts in her breast has been affirmed.

Taking into account the medical condition of the wife of the petitioneras also his conduct in jail which is shown to be satisfactory along with theperiod of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined torelease the petitioner on parole for specified period.

Let the petitioner be released on parole for period of four weeks, tobe counted from the date of his release, on his furnishing bond in the sumof Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfactionSuperintendent of the concerned jail.

The petitioner shall abide by the conditions listed below:-

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 himself in any unlawful activity.

c) The petitioner would not leave, under any circumstance, theNational Capital Region of Delhi, without intimating theofficer-in-charge of the concerned police station.National Capital Region of Delhi, without intimating theofficer-in-charge of the concerned police station.

d) He shall furnish his and his sureties’ mobile telephone numbersto the SHO of the concerned police station so that in case ofnecessity he could be tracked and his whereabouts could beascertained.to the SHO of the concerned police station so that in case ofnecessity he could be tracked and his whereabouts could beascertained.

e) He shall get his presence marked by the SHO of the concernedpolice station once week preferably on Mondays at 11:00 a.m.In case, the petitioner flouts any one of the conditions, an applicationcould be moved by the SHO for cancellation of his parole and for taking ofcoercive steps for securing his attendance.

With these observations, the petition is disposed of.

The order be communicated to the Superintendent of the concernedjail for compliance and record.

Dasti.

JULY 20, 2017ab

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J