Parole is a right meant for rehabilitation and should consider current prisoner conduct rather than past infractions, balancing individual reform with public safety.

JUDGMENT

Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J.(Oral)--The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of petitioner for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Order No. F.18/96/2018/HG/1373 dated 07.10.2021 passed by the respondent and for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to release the petitioner on parole for a period of three months.

2. In brief, petitioner is life convict, presently serving sentence in case FIR No. 67/2011, under Sections 302/377 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at P.S.: Aman Vihar, Delhi. The judgment and order on sentence dated 07.04.2014 and 08.05.2014 respectively are stated to have been upheld in Crl. A. No. 1609/2014 vide judgment dated 16.12.2015.

3. The petitioner is stated to have undergone incarceration for about 10 years and 10 months in actual without remission and has also earned remission of about 01 year 07 months and 11 days as on 05.05.2020.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for grant of parole before the respondent vide application No.F.14/SCJ14/AS(CT)/PAROLE/2021/3372 dated 26.08.2021 to maintain social ties and family relations which has been rejected by the respondent vide the Order No. F.18/96/2018/HG/1373 dated 07.10.2021, mechanically on the stereotype grounds of jail conduct of the petitioner being `unsatisfactory' and based upon police verification report dated 12.08.2021.

5. Reliance is further placed on Rule 1210 sub rule (II) Delhi Prison Rule, 2018:, which reads as follows:

"The conduct of the prisoner who has been awarded major punishment for any prison offence should have been uniformly good for last two years from the date of application and the conduct of prisoner who has been awarded minor punishment or no punishment for any prison offence in prison should have been uniformly good for last one year from the date of application.

6. It is further urged that the last punishment awarded to the petitioner for a prison offence was on 25.04.2019 and the petitioner has been thereafter maintaining `good conduct' for about last 03 years in jail. It is also submitted that the petitioner is unmarried, aged about 32 years and his family comprises of old aged parents who are suffering from old age ailments, two younger brothers and two married sisters who are presently living in their matrimonial homes. Petitioner is stated to belong to poor strata of the society and it is prayed that Petitioner needs to meet his family and arrange finances for their subsistence.

7. Reference is made to an order dated 15/01/2021, passed in Sonu @ Ashutosh Tiwari Ys. The State (Goyt. Of NCT Of Delhi) in W.P. (Crl) 2209/2020 in support of contentions.

"The State has fairly submitted through the ASC for State that there is an error in the nominal roll that had been placed on record as issued by the Deputy Superintendent, Central Jail No.3, Tihar, New Delhi mentioning the recovery of a mobile phone from the applicant on 14.01.2020 and rather what was recovered from the applicant was some loose tobacco. It is further submitted on behalf of the State that there are other involvements of the applicant which include a physical scuffle with the co-accused on 30.04.2020 and a threat of filing a false complaint against the jail staff and creating a lot of nuisance on 07.02.2019.

The aspect of the address of the petitioner and the number of persons residing in his family with the petitioner's mother being an old aged lady is however verified, though it is brought forth also through the status rep