Delhi High Court
Rabbani @ Sameer vs State on 14 September, 2017
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 14.09.2017
+ W.P.(CRL) 1368/2017
RABBANI @ SAMEER ..... Petitioner
Through Ms.Aishwarya Rao, Adv.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing
Counsel (Criminal) for the State with
Mr.Jamal Akhtar, Adv. along with SI Ombir
Singh, P.S. Welcome.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
VINOD GOEL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section
482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of parole for a
period of three months in order to maintain social ties and to
enable him to file Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court against the order dated 23rd March, 2016 by
which Crl. Appeal No.648/2013 was dismissed by this Court.
2. Status report has been filed. The petitioner has also filed the
additional affidavit.
3. As per the nominal roll, the petitioner was convicted under
section 302 IPC by the learned District and Sessions Judge,
Karkardooma Court, Delhi, and he was sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1,000/- by order
dated 8th March, 2013. He has undergone imprisonment for five
years, nine months and twenty eight days. He has never been
granted parole during this period. However, his parole
application was rejected by the competent authority on 9 th
March, 2017.
4. As per the nominal roll, the overall conduct of the petitioner has
been satisfactory.
5. Learned Standing counsel points out that the petitioner was
convicted for murdering his wife and surprisingly his father-in-
law, who is present in court, intends to stand surety for him in
case he is released on parole and the petitioner intends to reside
with his father-in-law during parole period.
6. Mr.Liaqat Ali, father-in-law of the petitioner, is present in court.
On asking he confirms that he intends to stand surety for the
petitioner in case he is released on parole.
7. Admittedly, the appellant was convicted by learned District and
Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Court, under Section 302 IPC
and his appeal, being Crl.A. No.648/2013 was dismissed on 23 rd
March, 2016 by this Court. His overall conduct in the jail has
been found to be satisfactory.
8. The statutory right of the petitioner to file Special Leave
Petition (Crl.) in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India cannot be
emasculated by asking him to avail of the service of a legal aid
counsel in the jail.
9. In the circumstances, to enable the petitioner to avail of his
statutory right to prefer Special Leave Petition (Crl.) in the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India against the order of dismissal
of Crl.Appeal No.648/2013 vide order dated 23rd March, 2016,
he be released on Parole for a period of four weeks from the
date of his release on the following terms and conditions: -
(i) the petitioner shall furnish his personal
bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the
concerned Jail Superintendent.
(ii) the petitioner shall maintain good conduct
and behaviour during his release.
(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the National
Capital Territory of Delhi.
(iv) the petitioner shall provide mobile number
of the surety which will be kept in active mode
and shall not be changed without the permission
of the Court.
(v) the petitioner shall report his presence to
the SHO of the area every Monday and Thursday
at 11.00 AM.
(vi) He shall surrender to Jail Superintendent
immediately after completion of parole period.
10. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
11. Copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendent.
12. Copy of this order be given dasti.
VINOD GOEL, J.
SEPTEMBER 14, 2017/jitender
