Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(CRL)1619/2016& CRL.M.A.8441/2016
SHYAM PAL Petitioner
W.P.(CRL)1619/2016& CRL.M.A.8441/2016
SHYAM PAL Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE(NCT OF DELHI) Respondent
W.P.(CRL)1630/2016& CRL.M.A.8501/2016
SHYAM PAL Petitioner
SHYAM PAL Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE(NCT OF DELHI) Respondent
Through: Mr Jayant K.Sud,Mr Honey Khanna and Ms Vaishali Soni,Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr Ashish Aggarwal,Addl. Standing Counsel(Crl.)for State.
Through: Mr Jayant K.Sud,Mr Honey Khanna and Ms Vaishali Soni,Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr Ashish Aggarwal,Addl. Standing Counsel(Crl.)for State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
31.05.2016 The present petitions under Article 226 ofthe Constitution ofIndia read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 inter alia seek a direction to the competent authority to expeditiously decide the representation for parole filed by the petitioner.
Mr Ashish Aggarwal, learned Additional Standing Counsel (Crl.) appearing on behalf of the State, states that although upon verification it has been ascertained that no such representation seeking parole filed by the petitioner is pending before the competent authority, the competent authority will treat the present petition as a representation and dispose it ofin accordance with law, within a period often working days from today, under intimation to
2016:DHC:9112 M the petitioner.
Directed accordingly.
With the above direction the writ petition is disposed ofreserving liberty to the petitioner to approach this courtin the eventthe representation for parole, as above,is not considered favourably.
A copy ofthis order be given dasti under signature of Court Master to counsel for the parties.
SID5)HARTH MRIDUL,J MAY 31,2016 mk 2016:DHC:9112
31.05.2016 The present petitions under Article 226 ofthe Constitution ofIndia read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 inter alia seek a direction to the competent authority to expeditiously decide the representation for parole filed by the petitioner.
Mr Ashish Aggarwal, learned Additional Standing Counsel (Crl.) appearing on behalf of the State, states that although upon verification it has been ascertained that no such representation seeking parole filed by the petitioner is pending before the competent authority, the competent authority will treat the present petition as a representation and dispose it ofin accordance with law, within a period often working days from today, under intimation to
2016:DHC:9112 M the petitioner.
Directed accordingly.
With the above direction the writ petition is disposed ofreserving liberty to the petitioner to approach this courtin the eventthe representation for parole, as above,is not considered favourably.
A copy ofthis order be given dasti under signature of Court Master to counsel for the parties.
SID5)HARTH MRIDUL,J MAY 31,2016 mk 2016:DHC:9112
JUDGMENT