Petitioner, a prisoner in continuous custody since December 2010 in six cases including murder, challenged rejection of parole application. Court granted two-week parole subject to personal bond, surety, and alternate-day reporting to police station.
Parole granted for two weeks upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety bond of like amount.
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.
$~35
| * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DE |
LHI AT NEW DELHI |
|---|---|
| + W.P.(CRL) 779/2018 |
|
| ASHISH @ KALI @ AMAR | ..... Petitioner |
| Represented by: | Mr. Archit Upadhayay, Advocate (DHCLSC). Ms. Baby and Sunita, Sisters of petitioner in person. |
| versus | |
| STATE Represented by: |
..... Respondent Ms. Iti Pandey, Advocate for Ms. Nandita Rao, ASC for the State with Insp. Balbir Singh, PS Vijay Vihar, Delhi. |
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 17.09.2018
since 31st December, 2010 that is the date of arrest in FIR No. 429/2010 under Sections 302/394/34 IPC registered at PS Vijay Vihar, Delhi.
MUKTA GUPTA, J. SEPTEMBER 17, 2018
‘yo’
page 2 of 2
W.P.(CRL) 779/2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether parole should be granted to the petitioner who has been in custody for over seven years for the purpose of filing an SLP before the Supreme Court and re-establishing social ties.
Ashish @ Kali @ Amar
State (through Union of India)
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
