Delhi High Court
Subhash Chand vs The State & Ors on 12 January, 2016
#24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 12.01.2016
W.P.(CRL) 91/2016
SUBHASH CHAND ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Suraj Rathi, Advocate
versus
THE STATE & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, ASC
(Criminal) with Mr. Piyush Singhal,
Advocate with SI Badri Prasad, PS-
Connaught Place for R-1
Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)
CRL.M.A.487/2016 (Exemption)
Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
W.P.(CRL) 91/2016
1. The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for a direction to the official respondent to release the petitioner on
parole in order to enable him to organize finance and attend the marriage of
his son Amit Kumar, scheduled to be performed on 11.02.2016.
2. The petitioner had earlier instituted a similar petition being W.P.
(CRL) No.3061/2015, which was disposed of by this Court by way of the
order dated 22.12.2015 which is as under:-
" Mr. Mahajan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the official respondent/respondent No.1, states that the
representation filed by the petitioner seeking parole which is
pending before the competent authority shall be disposed of
in accordance with law within a period of five working days
from today under intimation to the petitioner. Ordered
accordingly.
In view of the above, counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this petition at this
stage with liberty to approach this court in the event he is
aggrieved by the order passed by the competent authority.
Leave and liberty granted. The writ petition is
dismissed as withdrawn and disposed of accordingly.
Dasti."
3. It is an admitted position that despite the order dated 22.12.2015
passed by this Court, the competent authority has failed to dispose of the
petitioner's representation seeking parole on the afore-stated grounds, as
directed. No response has been forthcoming from the official respondents in
this behalf.
4. The competent authority, in these circumstances, is directed to furnish
an explanation qua its inertia, despite directions issued by this Court, within
a period of two weeks from today, supported by an affidavit.
5. As above mentioned, the marriage of the petitioner's son Amit Kumar
is scheduled for 11.02.2016. The marriage is scheduled to be performed in
village Khandarai, Tehsil Gohana, Sonepat, Haryana. The factum of
marriage and the address of the venue where it is scheduled to be performed
has been verified.
6. In view of the foregoing, I see no impendent in allowing the present
petition. The petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of
one month from the date of his release subject to his furnishing a personal
bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to
the satisfaction of the trial court subject to the following conditions:-
(i) During the period the petitioner remains out on parole,
he shall report to the SHO, Police Station- Khanpur
Kalan, Tehsil Gohana, Sonepat, Haryana, once a week
on every Thursday.
(ii) The petitioner shall also provide the SHO, Police
Station- Khanpur Kalan, Tehsil Gohana, Sonepat,
Haryana with his mobile telephone number which he
undertakes to keep operational.
(iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Police
Station- Khanpur Kalan, Tehsil Gohana, Sonepat,
Haryana during the period of parole, without the prior
permission of this Court except to surrender before
the jail authorities.
(iv) The petitioner is directed to surrender before the jail
authorities at the expiry of the period of parole.
7. The writ petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
8. The explanation supported by an affidavit, as directed above, to be
furnished by the competent authority may, however, be placed before this
Court once received.
9. A copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Tihar
for necessary information and compliance. A copy of this order be given
dasti under the signature of Court Master to counsel for the parties.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
JANUARY 12, 2016
dn
