Delhi High Court
Prabhat Singh vs State on 18 September, 2017
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 18.09.2017
+ W.P.(CRL) 1872/2017
PRABHAT SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Puneett Singhal, Adv.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through Mr.R.S. Kundu, ASC for State
with SI Davinder Kumar, PS SIU/Crime
Branch, Kotwali.
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 the issuance of writ
of mandamus to release him on parole.
2. Status report has been filed.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner was ordered to be released on
parole by the competent authority vide order No.F.18/333/2014/
HOME(G)/2466 dated 27th April, 2017 for a period of four
weeks, subject to certain terms and conditions including that he
shall be released only after the surrender of the other co-
accused, who is on parole.
4. The learned ASC points out, on instructions from the IO, that
the address of the petitioner where he would reside in case he is
released on parole has been verified and found to be correct.
Learned ASC submits that the co-convict namely Sandeep s/o
Sukhir, who was released on parole from Central Jail No.4, did
not surrender after expiry of the parole period and for this
reason, the petitioner should be allowed to be released on
parole.
5. A perusal of the nominal roll shows that the petitioner was
convicted under Section 364A/343/353/307/120B/34 IPC, PS
New Ashok Nagar, vide FIR No.175/2001 by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, and he
was sentenced on 25th September, 2009 to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.15,000/- and in default 17
months simple imprisonment. He had undergone imprisonment
for 11 years, one month and twenty five days. The nominal roll
further reflects that he was released on furlough nine times for
various spells during the years 2014 to 2017 by the DGP. He
was released on parole for four weeks with effect from 20th
December, 2014 to 18th January, 2015 and from 03.03.2016 to
31.03.2016 by this Court. His overall conduct in the jail has
always been satisfactory.
6. Simply because the co-convict has jumped the parole and has
not surrendered after expiry of the parole granted, the petitioner
cannot be punished for the conduct of the co-convict. For this
reason, the fundamental rights of the petitioner cannot be
emasculated. Moreover, the petitioner has no control over his
co-convict who had jumped the parole.
7. Hence, in the circumstances of the case, the petitioner 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.4,000/- 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 the period of his release.
(iii) the petitioner shall provide mobile number of
the surety which shall be kept in active mode and shall
not be changed without the permission of the Court.
(iv) the petitioner shall report his presence to the
concerned SHO, P.S. Shikarpur, District
Bulandshahar, U.P. every Monday and Thursday.
(v) He shall surrender to Jail Superintendent
immediately after expiry of parole period.
8. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
9. Copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendent.
10. Copy of this order be given dasti.
VINOD GOEL, J.
SEPTEMBER 18, 2017/jitender
