Allowed

V v. State of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC20 May 2026W.P.(CRL)/1622/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A POCSO convict whose appeal and parole representation were rejected sought certiorari and release on parole for four weeks to file an SLP. The Court held that filing an SLP is a special circumstance and the Rule 1211(VII) bar is not absolute, releasing him on parole subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on parole for four weeks on personal bond of Rs.10,000 with one surety, subject to reporting and non-contact conditions.

V Vs State of NCT of Delhi — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~87

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 1622/2026, CRL.M.A. 16231/2026

¶4

V ...Petitioner Through: Ms. Pallavi Garg (DHCLSC) and Ms. Sanjana Sharma Sahu, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ...Respondent Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for State with SI Deepika, PS: Timarpur

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶9

O R D E R % 20.05.2026

¶10

By virtue of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari against the impugned Rejection Order No.F.18/13/2026/HG/Prisons/576062 dated 13.04.2026 passed by the Competent Authority, as also directions to release the petitioner on parole for a period of four weeks for filing a Special Leave Petition ( SLP ) before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶11

Succinctly put , this Court vide order dated 27.11.2025 in CRL.A. 1060/2018 dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner thereby upholding the judgement on conviction dated 29.05.2018 as well as order on sentence dated 03.07.2018 passed by the learned Trial Court arising out of FIR No.75/2015 registered at PS: Timarpur whereby the petitioner has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a cumulative period

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 22/05/2026 at 12:50:09

¶14

of ten years along with payment of fine under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ( POCSO Act ) and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ). Being aggrieved by the said order dated 27.11.2025 and intending to file an SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the petitioner made a representation before the Competent Authority seeking grant of parole which was rejected vide the impugned order citing Rule 1211(VII) of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 ( Rules ).

¶15

Learned counsel for petitioner primarily submits that it is the fundamental right of the petitioner under the Constitution of India to be represented by a counsel of his choice in order to pursue the final remedies available to him in the form of an SLP, for which he requires grant of parole. He has also relied upon the order dated 27.03.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.(Crl.) 980/2026, as also numerous orders passed by Coordinate Benches of this Court wherein filing of an SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been unequivocally held to constitute a special circumstances and petitioners convicted under the POCSO Act have also been granted parole, thereby not treating the bar under Rule 1211(VII) of the Rules as absolute. He lastly submits that the petitioner has already undergone about four years and three months in incarceration, and his conduct while in custody has been satisfactory.

¶16

Issue notice. Learned ASC for the State accepts notice. 5. Taking an overall view of the facts and circumstances involved, especially the jurisprudential intent behind parole and the fundamental right of the petitioner to file an SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, for which he needs to be represented by a counsel of his choice to pursue the said remedy, the petitioner herein is directed to be released on parole

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 22/05/2026 at 12:50:09

¶19

for a period of four weeks from the date of his release, subject to him furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- ( Rupees Ten Thousand Only ) with one surety of the like amount by a family member/ friend having no criminal case pending against him/ her, as also subject to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent, and further subject to the following conditions:-

¶20

i. During the period the petitioner remains out on parole, the petitioner shall not leave NCT of Delhi and report to the SHO, PS: Timarpur on every Saturday.

¶21

ii. The petitioner shall also provide to the SHO, PS: Timarpur, his mobile number which shall be kept in working condition at all times.

¶22

iii. The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not communicate with or come in contact with the complainant/ victim/ survivor or any member of the complainant/ victim/ survivor’s family or tamper with the evidence of the case.

¶23

iv. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Jail Superintendent on the date of expiry of the period of four weeks of parole at or before 04:00 PM.

¶24

Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for information and necessary compliance.

¶25

The present petition is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶26

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶27

MAY 20, 2026/So

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 22/05/2026 at 12:50:09

V v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Kumar@Deepu Yadav Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Khalid Mehmood Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) through Standing Counsel (Criminal), Delhi High Court, New Delhi. &

Sv & Anr. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Deepak Alias Peta Vs the State (Govt, of NCT of Delhi)

Narendra Singh Nirwan Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Madhav Dass Vs the State NCT of Delhi

Raj Kumar Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Kartik Yadav Vs State & Ors.

Khalid Mehmood Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) through Standing Counsel (Criminal), Delhi High Court, New Delhi. &

Ajay Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Billa Verma Vs State NCT of Delhi

Gyanender Vs State

Aishvir Singh (Inspector) Vs State