Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 22.07.2026
MANISH KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Mr. Anmol Kumar Pandey and Ms. Jyoti Yadav, Advocates
Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC with Mr. Abhijit Kumar, Advocate with SI
Vikram
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner seeks parole for a period of thirty days in case FIR NO. 94/2001 of PS Delhi Cantt. for offence under Section 397 IPC.
2. At the outset, learned ASC expresses anguish that despite specific directions of this court vide order dated 02.07.2026 and her having discussed the matter even with the Deputy Secretary, Home Affairs, the competent authority has till date not decided the application dated 10.04.2026 of the st=Delhi, Date: 2026.07.22 19:18:05 +05'30' petitioner for being released on parole. Not just that, even pairvi officer has not been appointed by jail authorities till date to remain present in jail matters in court with complete instructions. Nothing can be worse inaction leading to complete frustration of the principles and philosophy behind the convict reformatory tools like parole and furlough. It appears that the State is not at all interested to oppose this petition.
3. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned ASC for State.
4. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner/convict that by way of application dated 10.04.2026, he applied for parole for a period of 30 days for maintaining family and social ties especially because, 19.07.2026 happened to be the death anniversary (though not the first one) of his father. It is further submitted that the petitioner hails from poor strata of society and needs to arrange money for his family consisting of an old age mother, two sisters and two brothers.
5. As per nominal rolls, during the period of his jail term from the year 2016 onwards, the petitioner was released on furlough/parole almost 13 times and he duly surrendered after the completion of the furlough/parole period.
6. Keeping in mind the above circumstances and complete lack of interest of State in opposing this petition, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on parole for a period of thirty days subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one Date: 2026.07.22 19:17:54 +05'30' surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Jail Superintendent. At the time of releasing the petitioner on parole, the concerned Jail Superintendent shall inform him in writing against acknowledgment, the specific date on which the petitioner has to surrender back after completion of parole period.
7. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for compliance.
8. Copy of this order be also sent to the Director General, Prisons, specifically drawing his attention to paragraph 2 of this order.
GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) JULY 22, 2026