Monu @ Bahadur v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Delhi dismissed a writ petition seeking parole for three months. The court found the petitioner's jail conduct unsatisfactory due to multiple punishments, rendering him ineligible per parole guidelines.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner's plea for parole was dismissed in the status quo.
What the court decided
$~61
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- W.P.(CRL) 422/2016
MONU @ BAHADUR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Ajit Sharma, Advocate
versus
STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Ashish Aggarwal, A.S.C. for the State with Mr.Piyush Singhal, Adv. with SI Sanjay PS Ambedkar Nagar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
O R D E R % 09.02.2016
- By way of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., petitioner is seeking parole for a period of three months on the ground of completing the unfinished structure of his house, getting appropriate treatment from the private hospital for the ailment of piles and reconnecting social ties with the family & society.
- A perusal of the nominal roll reveals that overall jail conduct of the Petitioner has been unsatisfactory and punishments dated 27th November, 2015, 11th July, 2015, 29th May, 2013 & 19th August, 2008 have been awarded to him.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for parole given unsatisfactory jail conduct and prior punishments.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Monu @ Bahadur
- respondent
State
Coram
Pratibha Rani
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court