Lalit Kumar vs State Of Nct Of Delhi
2011 Latest Caselaw 851 Del

*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+                            W.P.(CRL) 42/2011

                                                        Decided on 11.02.2011
IN THE MATTER OF :
LALIT KUMAR                                                   ..... Petitioner
                          Through: Mr. A.J.Bhambhani and
                          Ms.Nisha Bhambhani, Advocates
                    versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                                ..... Respondent
                    Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC

CORAM

* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

     1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may           No
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

     2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?          No

     3. Whether the judgment should be                  No
        reported in the Digest?

HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)

1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article

226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC praying

inter alia for quashing of the orders dated 17.06.2010 & 1.9.2010 passed by

the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant

of parole on the ground of non-verification of the address given by him. The

petitioner has also sought his release for a period of three months to engage

a counsel for drafting and filing a SLP in the Supreme Court against the

judgment dated 11.02.2010 passed by a Division Bench in Crl.Appeal

No.674/2005 arising out of FIR No.313/2003 under Sections 364A/34 IPC.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that under the impugned

judgment, the trial court judgment has been upheld and the petitioner has

been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of `2,000/- and in

default thereof, to undergo RI for six months.

3. The nominal roll of the petitioner was called for. As per the said

nominal roll, against a quantum of sentence of life imprisonment and a fine

of `2,000/-in default, RI for six months, as on 11.12.2010, the petitioner

had undergone a sentence of seven years, four months and nine days and

earned remission for one year, nine months and five days. His jail conduct

for the past one year is recorded as satisfactory and there is no other case

pending against him.

4. Counsel for the petitioner states that the only ground for

rejecting the application for parole was that the address given by him for

verification was found not to exist.

5. A Status Report is handed over by the learned ASC for the State,

wherein it is submitted that a visit was made to the permanent address of

the petitioner at village Sirsor, PS Sanmera, Distt.Nalanda, Bihar and on

verification, it is found that he and his father are permanent residents of the

said village. As far as the Delhi address given by the petitioner is

concerned, it was found that the brother of the petitioner has been residing

at house No.2315, Gali No.4, New Oberoi Farm, Prem Chowk, Kapashera,

Delhi for the last ten years and has also been running a small shop from the

said address.

6. As the sole ground for rejection of the parole application of the

petitioner was non-verification of the address which has now been verified

and found to be correct, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner is entitled

to grant of parole for preferring a SLP in the Supreme Court against the

impugned judgment dated 11.2.2010 passed in Crl.Appeal No.674/2005.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted parole

for a period of four weeks, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of `10,000/-

with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

(ii) The petitioner shall report to the SHO of local Police Station once a week on every Sunday at 10:00 AM and shall not leave the National Capital Territory of Delhi during the period of parole.

(iii) The petitioner shall furnish a telephone number to the Jail Superintendent on which he can be contacted, if required. After his release, he shall also inform his telephone number to the SHO of the police station concerned.

(iv) Immediately upon the expiry of period of parole, the petitioner shall surrender himself before the Jail Superintendent.

(v) The petitioner shall furnish a copy of the SLP filed in the Supreme Court to the Superintendent Jail at the time of surrendering.

(vi) The period of parole shall be counted from the day after the date when the petitioner is released from jail.

7. The petition is disposed of.

DASTI.

A copy of this order be forwarded by the Registry forthwith to the

Superintendent Jail for information and perusal.

                                                                    (HIMA KOHLI)
FEBRUARY 11, 2011                                                      JUDGE
mk