Mohd. Islam v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge granted parole to petitioner convicted under NR Act for one month to reunite with family, subject to bond and conditions not contacting the prosecutrix.
What did the court decide?
Parole granted for four weeks on bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety, with conditions not to contact prosecutrix and report to SHO.
What the court decided
$~17
| * IN THE HIGH C |
OURT OF DE | LHI AT NEW DELHI |
|---|---|---|
| + W.P.(CRL) 99/201 |
6 | |
| MOHD. ISLAM | ..... Petitioner | |
| Through: versus |
Mr Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Adv. (DHCLSC) | |
| STATE | ..... Respondent | |
| CORAM: | Through: | Mr Rahul Mehta, Standing Counsel for State with Mr Jamel Akhtar, Adv. alongwith Sub Inspector Gaurav Police Station Jahangir Puri, Delhi FIR No.669/2003 Under Sections 302/376/201 IPC Police Station : Jahangir Puri |
| HON'BLE MS. JU | STICE SUNITA O R D E R |
GUPTA |
| % | 13.01.2016 |
Vide this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner seeks parole for a period of one month in order to reunite the social ties with family and society.
Notice.
Mr Rahul Mehra, learned Standing Counsel for the State accepts notice and submits the status report verifying the address of the petitioner.
It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that earlier also the petitioner was granted parole twice and never misused the same.
Learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that the prosecutrix is also residing near the vicinity of the petitioner. However, he has no objection to the grant of parole to the petitioner.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted parole for social ties.
Whether the petitioner can visit the prosecutrix during parole.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
MOHD. ISLAM
- respondent
STATE
Coram
SUNITA GUPTA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court