Allowed

Rajender @ Raju v. State

Delhi HC15 Feb 2017W.P.(CRL)/487/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking parole to attend his brother's wedding. The court allowed the petition, directing release on parole for four weeks subject to specific conditions including bond, reporting, and surrender. The State tendered a status report verifying the marriage fact.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on parole for a period of four weeks subject to furnishing bond, reporting to police, and other conditions.

Rajender @ Raju Vs State — Bail and Remand | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~33.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 487/2017

¶4

RAJENDER @ RAJU ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate. versus

¶5

STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, ASC along with SI Ramesh Kumar, PS-Sultan Puri, for the State.

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

¶7

¶8

O R D E R 15.02.2017

¶9

Issue notice. Ms. Kapoor accepts notice. She has tendered a status report, which is taken on record.

¶10

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to seek a direction that he be released on parole for a period of 3 months. The ground taken by the petitioner is that the marriage of his brother is fixed on 18.02.2017. A copy of the marriage card has been annexed with the petition.

¶11

Ms. Kapoor submits on the basis of the status report that the verification has been got done and the petitioner’s address as well as the fact of the marriage has been verified.

¶12

The nominal roll on record shows that the petitioner is undergoing a life sentence in case FIR No.213/2003 under Section 364A/ 307/ 34 IPC registered at PS – Sultan Puri. He has already undergone 13 years, 9 months

¶13

and 08 days of incarceration as on 18.01.2017. The jail conduct of the petitioner for the last one year has been found to be satisfactory. He was punished on 25.07.2014 for surrendering 06 days late after availing furlough. He has been released on furlough from 2014 onwards and even till as late as between 05.08.2016 and 19.08.2016.

¶14

Since the fact of the marriage of the petitioner’s brother has been got verified, I am inclined to allow the petition. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of four weeks subject to:

¶15

i) his furnishing personal bond with one surety in the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent;

¶16

ii) he shall provide his mobile phone number to the Jail Superintendent at the time of his release, which shall be kept in working condition at all times. The same shall not be changed without prior intimation to the Jail Superintendent;

¶17

iii) he shall report at the local police station to mark his attendance on every Monday at 11:00 a.m. during the period of parole;

¶18

iv) he shall duly surrender at the end of the period of parole; and

¶19

v) he shall also not indulge in any criminal activity while on parole.

¶20

A copy of this order be communicated to the Jail Superintendant

¶21

concerned.

¶22

Order dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

¶23

VIPIN SANGHI, J

¶24

FEBRUARY 15, 2017

¶25

B.S. Rohella

Rajender @ Raju v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajender @ Raju v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Yadav Vs State & Ors.

Atul Sharma & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Salma Vs State & Anr.

Mohd. Yamin Vs State & Anr.

Vinod Kumar Bharti & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Rekha Vs State

Satvinder Saini & Ors. Vs State & Ors.

Rama Sharda Vs State & Ors.

Vikas Yadav Vs State & Ors.

Atul Sharma & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Parul Sharma & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ram Kishan Vs State

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of NCT of Delhi