The Single Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Neeraj Bhatt vs The State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi consisting of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held that the right of a citizen to effectively pursue his legal remedy in the last court of justice by filing Special Leave Petition (hereinafter referred to as “SLP”) through a counsel of his own choice is valuable. This cannot be withheld merely based on his past conduct or on the ground that free legal aid is available and that SLP can be filed from the jail itself.
Facts:
This Writ Petition under Article read with u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”) was filed by the Petitioner for issuance of a writ of Certiorari for quashing of the order passed by the Respondent rejecting the application of the Petitioner seeking parole and also for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent to release the Petitioner on parole for four weeks on the ground of filing SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India against the judgment passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 391/2021 whereby the conviction and order on sentence were passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Saket Courts, New Delhi.
Contentions Made:
Petitioner: It was contended that the Petitioner had already undergone incarceration of about 8 years and 6 months. It was stated that he desired to file an SLP for which he sought parole. It was further stated that an application was filed before the Home Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, and the same was dismissed by the Respondent, observing that there were no special circumstances that existed for grant of parole and the convict could file SLP from the jail itself where free legal aid is available to all prisoners.
Respondent: It was argued that the Applicant was not entitled to parole given Rule 1210 (II) and Rule 1211 of Delhi Prison Rule, 2018. It was stated that as per the nominal roll, the Applicant had been awarded multiple punishments. Therefore, there was no illegality in the order passed by the competent authority and the petition was liable to be rejected.
Observations of the Court:
The Bench opined that the bar of Rule 1211 of Delhi Prison Rule, 2018 is not an absolute bar and there exists discretion to grant parole if special circumstances exist. It was opined that the right to avail a legal remedy cannot be denied on grounds that SLP can be filed from the jail itself and that conduct of Applicant was not satisfactory.
Moreover, the right to pursue a legal remedy effectively is valuable and it cannot be withheld merely on basis of past conduct or that SLP can be filed from the jail itself.
The High Court expounded that availing legal remedy is the right of the Petitioner and the same cannot be withheld by the Court.
The decision of the Court:
Taking note of the fact that the Petitioner had continuously remained in jail for around eight years and six months, excluding remission, the Bench allowed the present petition.
Case: Neeraj Bhatt vs The State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi
Case No: W.P.(CRL.) 3071/2022
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
Advocates for Petitioner: Mr. Kunal Malhotra and Mr. Ravinder Gaur
Advocates for Respondent: Mr. Sachin Mittal, ASC for State with Mr. Nishant Chauhan
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
