Petitioner sought 60 days parole in a murder case; competent authority had not yet decided his parole application. The court treated the petition as a representation and directed the Competent Authority to decide it within two weeks.
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.
$~22
BHUPENDER SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav and Mr. Anmol Kumar Pandey, Advocates.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC (Crl) for State and Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate along with SI Mahesh Rawat.
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/07/2025 at 13:26:30
will be decided within a period of 02 weeks.
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
JULY 16, 2025/vc
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/07/2025 at 13:26:30
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhupender Singh
State (NCT of Delhi)
Swarana Kanta Sharma
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
