IMPORTANT POINT
The right to file an SLP before the Supreme Court is a valuable right that should not be denied based on past conduct.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. (Oral)

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') has been filed on behalf of petitioner seeking setting aside of impugned order dated 31.05.2023 bearing No. F/18/16/2023/HG/1525 passed by the respondent; and for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus seeking release of petitioner on parole for a period of two months.

2. The petitioner is presently confined in Mandoli Jail No. 11, Delhi. By virtue of judgment dated 22.09.2022, the petitioner was convicted under Section 302/120B/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860(`IPC') in case arising out of FIR bearing no. 356/2007, registered at Police Station, Hauz Qazi, Delhi and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tiz Hazari Courts, Delhi. His appeal against conviction i.e., CRL.A. 489/2020 was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 03.03.2023.

3. Learned ASC for the State opposes the present writ petition and submits that the order of rejection dated 31.05.2023was passed by the concerned authorities keeping in mind the past conduct of the petitioner and that he there are six other cases pending against him and the petitioner can jump parole if released as he is a habitual offender. In these circumstances, the present writ petition for grant of parole be dismissed.

4. On the other hand, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that the petitioner is seeking grant of parole for a period of two months for filing SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India against the judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court dismissing petitioners Criminal Appeal vide order dated 03.03.2022. It is further submitted that the application of grant of parole to the petitioner was rejected by the respondents vide order date 31.05.2023on the ground that the there are six other cases pending against him and the petitioner can jump parole if released. However, in this regard it is submitted that the petitioner has never been released on parole before and that this Court had earlier granted interim bail to the petitioner and that he had surrendered on time and had not misused the liberty granted to him. It is further contended that the said order of rejection is contrary to the fundamental principles of law and is liable to be set aside. Therefore, the petitioner be granted parole for a period of two months as prayed for.

5. This Court has heard arguments on behalf of both the parties and has gone through the material placed on record.

6. This Court has perused rejection order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the respondents and the same is reproduced as under:

"With reference to your office letter F.11/SCJ- 11/AS(CT)/2023/864 dated 10.04.2023, onthe subject cited above, I am to inform you that the request in respect of the above said convict for grant of parole has been considered and rejected by the Hon'ble Lt. Governor of Delhi in view of the followings:

1 As per nominal roll, 06 other cases are pending against the above said convict.

2 Further, as per police verification report received from the office of SHO, PS- Hauz Qazi, it is stated that he is a habitual offender. There is possibility of jumping parole and committing similar offence by the said convict or by engaging in gang activity with robbers, dacoits, kidnappers and extortionists.

The convict may be informed accordingly".

7. Thus, the application for grant of parole filed by the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that he has six other cases pending against him and that as per the police verification report he is a habitual offender and therefore, there is a possibility of jumping parole and committing a similar offence.

8. This Court has also gone through the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018. Rule 1197 and 1200 provide insight as to what objects are achieved by releasing a convict on parole. The said rules read as under:

"1197. Parole and Furlough to inm