Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Aas Mohammad – Appellant
Versus
NCT of Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for parole. (Para 1) |
| 2. respondent's commitment to decide application promptly. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. binding nature of the respondent's undertaking. (Para 4) |
| 4. disposition of the writ petition. (Para 5) |
This matter has been taken up for hearing by videoconferencing, consequent to listing thereof having been allowed by the Registrar of this Court.
Crl. M.A. 7383/2020
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.
W.P. (CRL) 891/2020
1. The only substantial prayer, in this petition, is for issuance of a direction, to the respondents, to decide the application, dated 20th April, 2020, of the petitioner, whereby he has sought two months' parole.
2. Mr. Piyush Singhal, learned APP, fairly states, on instructions, that he would ensure that the application dated 20th April, 2020 of the petitioner, is decided within a period of 7 days, and would communicate the decision to Mr. Sanjeev Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner, at his email ID, which is available at page 18 of the paper book, as soon as the decision is taken.
3. Mr. Piyush Singhal submits that, with this undertaking, the prayer of the petition s
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
