Full Text
Translation output
2- HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(CRL) 792/2011
RAJESH Petitioner
Through Mr. Sumeet Verma, Adv.
W.P.(CRL) 792/2011
RAJESH Petitioner
Through Mr. Sumeet Verma, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE Respondent
Through Mr. Ranjit Kapoor, Additional Standing Counsel (Crl.) for the State with Mr. Rampal Singh, Inspector
P.S. Nangloi.
Through Mr. Ranjit Kapoor, Additional Standing Counsel (Crl.) for the State with Mr. Rampal Singh, Inspector
P.S. Nangloi.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
04.07.2011 By this petition the Petitioner seeks parole on the ground that he has to get his daughter admitted in the school. As per the nominal roll the
Petitioner has been convicted for offence under Section 302/34 IPG and awarded life imprisonment. The Petitioner has undergone nearly six and a half years as on date. The Petitioner was last granted parole in March 2009 and April 2010. The application for parole filed by the Petitioner before the
Government was rejected on the ground that the Petitioner may jump the parole as he has no permanent address and the reasons for parole was not
04.07.2011 By this petition the Petitioner seeks parole on the ground that he has to get his daughter admitted in the school. As per the nominal roll the
Petitioner has been convicted for offence under Section 302/34 IPG and awarded life imprisonment. The Petitioner has undergone nearly six and a half years as on date. The Petitioner was last granted parole in March 2009 and April 2010. The application for parole filed by the Petitioner before the
Government was rejected on the ground that the Petitioner may jump the parole as he has no permanent address and the reasons for parole was not
W.R(CRL) 792/2011
2011:DHC:17951 \ found adequate. A status report was filed which shows that the wife of the
Petitioner is staying with her mother at House No. F-2/416, Sultan Puri, Delhi near Jalebi Chowk along with her two daughters. The Petitioner's wife is doing a private job in shoe factory. It is thus contended that she can get her daughter admitted in a school.
Be that as it may, since the Petitioner has been twice granted parole and he has not misused the concession, apparently there should be no apprehension that he will jump the parole. Further to say that the Petitioner has no permanent address would be incorrect because it has been found that his wife and children are residing with Smt. Prabho Devi at the address mentioned above.
It is, therefore, directed that the Petitioner be released on parole for a period of one month on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
25,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the
Learned Trial Court/ CMM. Copy of the order be sent to the Petitioner through Superintendent Jail Tihar.
Petition is disposed of. t^MUKTA GUPTA,J JULY 04,2011
'ga'
2011:DHC:17951 \ found adequate. A status report was filed which shows that the wife of the
Petitioner is staying with her mother at House No. F-2/416, Sultan Puri, Delhi near Jalebi Chowk along with her two daughters. The Petitioner's wife is doing a private job in shoe factory. It is thus contended that she can get her daughter admitted in a school.
Be that as it may, since the Petitioner has been twice granted parole and he has not misused the concession, apparently there should be no apprehension that he will jump the parole. Further to say that the Petitioner has no permanent address would be incorrect because it has been found that his wife and children are residing with Smt. Prabho Devi at the address mentioned above.
It is, therefore, directed that the Petitioner be released on parole for a period of one month on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
25,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the
Learned Trial Court/ CMM. Copy of the order be sent to the Petitioner through Superintendent Jail Tihar.
Petition is disposed of. t^MUKTA GUPTA,J JULY 04,2011
'ga'
W.P.(CRL) 792/2011 page 2 of2 o/cLsy
'r-rjl n...I'' 1/
>•
55# HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(CRL) 792/2011
RAJESH Petitioner
Through: Ms. Charu Verma, Advocate for Mr. Sumeet Verma, Advocate.
'r-rjl n...I'' 1/
>•
55# HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(CRL) 792/2011
RAJESH Petitioner
Through: Ms. Charu Verma, Advocate for Mr. Sumeet Verma, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE Respondent
Through: IVIr. Manoj Ohri, APP.
Through: IVIr. Manoj Ohri, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER o/o 29.07.2011 Cri.
M.A. No. 8742/2011 (modification)
By this application the Petitioner seeks modification oftheorder dated
4^'^ July, 2011 and waiver ofthe surety amount.
In view of the fact that the Petitioner has not been able to furnish the surety bond in the sum of ?25,000/-, the order dated 4"^ July, 2011 is modified to the extent that the Petitioner be released on parole for a period of one monthon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ^10,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Court/CMM.
Application stands disposed of.
Copy of the order be communicated to the Petitioner thi'ough the
Superintendent, Tihar Jail.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JULY 29, 2011/'vn'
ORDER o/o 29.07.2011 Cri.
M.A. No. 8742/2011 (modification)
By this application the Petitioner seeks modification oftheorder dated
4^'^ July, 2011 and waiver ofthe surety amount.
In view of the fact that the Petitioner has not been able to furnish the surety bond in the sum of ?25,000/-, the order dated 4"^ July, 2011 is modified to the extent that the Petitioner be released on parole for a period of one monthon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ^10,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Court/CMM.
Application stands disposed of.
Copy of the order be communicated to the Petitioner thi'ough the
Superintendent, Tihar Jail.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JULY 29, 2011/'vn'
JUDGMENT