Naveen Ahuja v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court granted the petitioner a three-week parole, considering his satisfactory jail conduct and non-misuse of previous releases, aligning with familial needs.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner released on parole for three weeks subject to furnishing a bond of Rs. 5000 with one surety and reporting to local SHO.
What the court decided
$~21
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- W.P.(CRL) 44/2018 NAVEEN AHUJA
..... Petitioner Through Mr.Ajay Verma, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for State. SI Raj Kumar from Police Station Kapashera.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
O R D E R % 08.01.2018
Petitioner is seeking parole for the reasons as mentioned in the petition. One reason is that he wants to match look for a suitable match for his marriageble younger sister. The fact of the age of the sister of the petitioner stands verified by the Investigating Officer. The application of the petitioner has been rejected by the Competent Authority on the ground that the convict has recently availed 02 weeks furlough w.e.f.27.7.2017 to 11.8.2017. The earlier occasions when the petitioner had been granted both parole and furlough have been listed in his nominal roll. He has not misused the liberty which has been granted to him. The petitioner is a convict under Section 302 of the IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act. He is suffering life imprisonment. Life imprisonment means imprisonment for rest of
his life. The petitioner as on date has undergone incarceration of more than 12 years. His jail conduct is satisfactory.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is a fit case for grant of parole liberty given his past conduct and lack of misuse.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Naveen Ahuja
- respondent
State
Coram
Indermeet Kaur
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court