The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 and CrPC Section 482 seeking parole for a life convict. The court held that the petitioner does not qualify for parole due to serious threats to lives posed by co-accused who absconded on bail or parole.
Petitioner's application for parole is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~16
ANIL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Harish Kohli & Mr.Rohit Singh, Advocates
versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Richa Kapoor, ASC for the State with Mr.Ashish Negi & Mr.Rohit Kaul, Advocates with SI Manoj Dahiya PS Punjabi Bagh
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
O R D E R % 12.01.2016
CRL.M.A.18796/2015
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(CRL) 3060/2015
years 10 months and 22 days period.
“Mr. Avi Singh, learned Additional Standing Counsel (Criminal) states that the present petitioner has been convicted on account of having murdered the victim who was found in a vehicle along with his sister. Mr. Avi Singh further states that whilst on interim bail, a co-accused namely Satyawan @ Sonu, the brother of the petitioner absconded and committed murder of the brother of the deceased victim. The said co-accused Satyawan @ Sonu is still at large and was declared proclaimed offender in both cases.
Another co-accused of the petitioner namely Deepak had absconded after getting interim bail from the Trial Court and was declared proclaimed offender. Later he was arrested by police of Police Station Lodhi Colony and convicted for life imprisonment. The sentence imposed on the said co-accused Deepak was confirmed by this Court. However, the said coaccused Deepak, who was released on bail by the competent authority for one month, has jumped parole and absconded. The said co-accused Deepak is a cousin of the petitioner. Another co-accused of the petitioner namely Surinder @ Kaira, who was also granted parole for one month by this Court, is reported to have jumped parole and is absconding. It is, therefore, observed that there is a serious threat to the life of the complainant who had deposed against the petitioner and other co-accused before the trial court.
In view of the above, I do not think it appropriate to release the petitioner on parole on the aforementioned grounds.
The writ petition is dismissed.”
W.P.(CRL) 3060/2015
Page 2 of 3
PRATIBHA RANI, J.
JANUARY 12, 2016 ‘pg’
W.P.(CRL) 3060/2015
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be granted parole to reestablish social ties given the threat posed by absconding co-accused.
Whether the earlier dismissal of the petitioner's parole application is a fit case to enlarge him on parole.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Anil
State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)
Pratibha Rani
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
