SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
Virender Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Siddharth Mridul, J. (Oral)--The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking a mandamus to the official respondent to release the petitioner on parole in order to enable him to repair his damaged house as well as to re-establish social ties with the family and society.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 31.03.2016 whereby his representation for grant of parole on the above stated grounds was rejected by the Competent Authority for the following reasons:

    "...rejected in view of the following:

    (i) The convict is not entitled for parole as per para 12.5 of Parole/Furlough Guidelines 2010 specifies that "parole would ordinarily be not granted except, if in the discretion of the Competent Authority special circumstance exist for grant of parole" (c) If prisoner is a convict for multiple murder, as the convict has committed murder of three persons.

    (ii) Adverse police report which states that the grounds given in the application are not found genuine. The convict's family is residing in well constructed house. Convict's father and brothers are capable to look

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top