The High Court of Delhi dismissed a writ petition for parole. The petitioner, convicted earlier in the same year, sought parole to file a Special Leave Petition. The court held that the rejection by the competent authority was inconsonant with no errors under existing guidelines.
Petition dismissed. Order communicated to petitioner through Superintendent, Tihar Jail.
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.
43# $~
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 12.07.2018
W.P.(CRL) 1392/2018 Page 1 of 2
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JULY 12, 2018 ‘vn’
Page 2 of 2
W.P.(CRL) 1392/2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to parole despite less than one year of continuous custody to file a Special Leave Petition?
Manoj Kumar
State
Mukta Gupta
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
