Petitioner challenged parole rejection. Court noted petitioner had been granted furlough subsequently, rendering parole order unnecessary. Petition dismissed.
Application for parole dismissal as furlough granted subsequently nullifies need for parole order.
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.
31# $~
| * | IN THE HIGH COURT OF DE | LHI AT NEW DELHI |
|---|---|---|
| + | W.P.(CRL) 472/2018 | |
| YASHPAL @ MUKESH @ CHATT Represented by: versus |
OO ..... Petitioner Mr. Aalam Nijjar, Advocate for Mr. Madhav Khurana, Advocate. |
|
| THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Represented by: |
..... Respondent Ms. Iti Pandey, Advocate for Ms. Nandita Rao, Additional Standing Counsel for State with SI Mamta Chauhan, PS GTB Enclave. |
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
Crl. M.A. No. 2788/2018 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(CRL) 472/2018
By this petition the petitioner challenges the communication dated 4th December, 2017 declining to grant parole to the petitioner which the petitioner has sought on the ground of reconnecting social ties.
A perusal of the latest nominal roll of the petitioner reveals that presently the petitioner is on furlough w.e.f. 5th March, 2018 for a period of three weeks.
Since furlough has been granted to the petitioner after the rejection of the application for grant of parole, no order granting parole to the petitioner W.P.(CRL) 472/2018 Page 1 of 2
is required to be passed by this Court.
Application is dismissed.
Copy of the order be communicated to the petitioner through Superintendent, Mandoli Jail.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MARCH 23, 2018 ‘vn’
Page 2 of 2
W.P.(CRL) 472/2018
Yashpal @ Mukesh @ Chatt
The State of NCT of Delhi
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
