Suraj Pal v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought modification of parole order due to inability to furnish a ₹25,000 bond. Court modified order to release petitioner on parole for four weeks upon furnishing a ₹10,000 personal bond and one surety bond.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner to be released on parole for four weeks upon furnishing personal bond of ₹10,000 with one surety bond of like amount.
What the court decided
$~51
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- W.P.(CRL) 1725/2018 SURAJ PAL ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Kunal Malhotra, Advocate
versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Jamal Akhtar, Advocate for Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel for the State with SI Om Prakash, PS DBG Road
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 01.08.2018
Crl.M.A.No.29001/2018
- By this application, the petitioner seeks modification of the order dated 5th July, 2018 on the ground that the petitioner has not been able to furnish a surety bond for the sum of ₹25,000/- to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/CMM concerned.
- A perusal of the nominal roll reflects that the petitioner was granted parole for a period of four weeks with effect from 24th August, 2017 to 21st September, 2017 and as per the application, the petitioner had furnished one surety bond to the satisfaction of the Superintendent Jail by way of an FDR which is still lying in the jail records.
page 1 of 2
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on parole on furnishing a reduced personal and surety bond given previous parole arrangements.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Suraj Pal
- respondent
State
Coram
Mukta Gupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court