Ram Kishan v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought parole to re-establish social ties. The Court dismissed the plea, noting the petitioner had already been granted furlough four times in 2016, which met his needs. The Court directed adherence to parole and furlough guidelines.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed; DG(P) ordered to ensure strict adherence to parole and furlough guidelines without discrimination.
What the court decided
$~32.
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- W.P.(CRL) 485/2017 RAM KISHAN
..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Imran Khan, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel and Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocate along with SI Parmod Kumar, PSSangam Vihar, for the State.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
O R D E R % 15.02.2017
The petitioner has preferred this petition to seek a direction that he be released on parole to be able to re-establish his social ties.
The record shows that the petitioner made the said application on 20.09.2016, which has been rejected on 26.12.2016.
The nominal roll shows that the petitioner was on furlough between 12.09.2016 and 27.09.2016 granted by the DG(P), and again between 02.12.2016 and 16.12.2016 also granted by the DG(P).
The nominal roll also shows that the petitioner has been released on furlough on four occasions in the year 2016, which is contrary to the parole/
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
whether the petitioner is entitled to parole to re-establish social ties given repeated furlough grants.
whether the petitioner has been treated discriminatorily regarding furlough grants.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
RAM KISHAN
- respondent
STATE
Coram
VIPIN SANGHI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court