Vipin v. State GNCT of Delhi

1. A Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner/Vipin for grant of Parole for four week in case FIR No.906/1998 under Section 364- A, 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) Police Station Dabri, for maintaining social ties with the family.

2. It is submitted that an Application dated 11.07.2025 was filed by the Petitioner for seeking Parole but the same has not been decided even after one month, by the concerned Authority. The Petitioner was convicted in the present FIR vide Judgment dated 19.09.2001 and has been undergoing Rigorous Imprisonment for Life. He is in Judicial Custody for more than 33 years including remission. He has been released on Parole and Furlough on 35 counts and he has always surrendered timely and never committed any other offence. He has been granted benefit of emergency Parole during COVID period, when he was at liberty for a period of two years and thereafter, surrendered timely on 05.04.2023.

3. He had been granted Parole for a period of four weeks vide Order dated 30.04.2025 in W.P (Crl.) No.1325/2025 by this Court which was extended for a period of two weeks vide Order dated 26.05.2025.

4. It is submitted that his Application for Parole has not been decided by the Authorities till date. As per Rule 1200 of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 the objective of release of Prisoner on parole is to enable him to establish family ties and deal with familial and social matters and to enable him to maintain and develop his self-confidence. The conduct of the Petitioner in Jail is satisfactory and he has never been given any punishment inside Jail.

5. He belongs to the family of farmers and his entire family is dependent on the income from agriculture. The crop is ready but there is none to cut the crop as the Petitioner’s father is an old man and his brother has medical ailments. The presence of the Petitioner would secure his family and he would be able to give financial support to the family which is under financial crisis. Hence, a Prayer is made that the Petitioner be granted Parole for a period of four weeks.

6. The Status Report has been filed on behalf of the Respondent/State, wherein it is submitted that the Petitioner is resident of village Sonot, U.P. he has four brothers and a sister. The elder brother, Bhupinder has expired. The second brother, Nivesh, aged 43 years is working at the Airport in Delhi. The third brother, Banarsi Lal, aged 40 years is married and living along with his family with his parents. He is a farmer. The fourth brother, Dinesh, aged 38 years is working in Noida and residing there along with his family. The Petitioner’s sister is married. There are other brothers and family members to take care of the welfare of the parents. Therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to grant Parole to the Petitioner.

7. The Status Report filed today in the Court, be taken on record. Submissions heard and record perused.

8. It is not contested by the State that the Petitioner/Applicant is not entitled to Parole for which an Application had been filed on 11.07.2025. As per the Jail Rules, such Application should be decided within a period of four weeks. However, more than two months have elapsed despite which the Home Department has not finally taken any decision on the Parole Application.

9. The purpose of grant of Furlough and Parole is to ensure the physical and mental well being of the convicts and to ensure that they are able to meet their family members during the intervals in the year in Order to maintain their social ties. It is indeed unfortunate that despite being conscious of the objective, the Respondent does not recognize the importance significance and the purpose of such Applications for Parole. No explanation is forthcoming as to why the mandate of Delhi Prison Rules has not been followed to decide the Application for Parole within four weeks. It only reflects the indifference and callousness of the Respondents in being absolutely indifferent to the onvicts/Petitioner who are suffering incarceration in Jail for such a long period.

10. In view of the inaction and insensitivity of the Respondents to take decisions expeditiously on such Parole Applications, this Court is left with no option but to allow the Application for grant of Parole for four weeks to the Applicant/Petitioner. Considering the good conduct and no adverse Report against the Applicant, the Petitioner is granted Parole for a period of four weeks, on the following terms and conditions: i. The Petitioner shall furnish a Personal Bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent. ii. The Petitioner shall report to the SHO of the local area once a week on every Sunday between 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM during the period of Parole. iii. The Petitioner shall furnish a telephone/mobile number to the Jail Superintendent as well as SHO of local police station, on which he can he contacted, if required. The said telephone number shall be kept active and operational at all the times by the Petitioner. iv. The Petitioner shall ordinarily reside at the address mentioned in the Petition. v. Immediately upon the expiry of period of Parole, the Petitioner shall surrender before the Jail Superintendent. vi. The period of Parole shall be counted from the day when the Petitioner is released from jail.

11. The copy of the Order be sent to jail superintendent for compliance. The Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE SEPTEMBER 17, 2025 va