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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 47928

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
VINKAL PRASHAR VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR.
W.P.(CRL) 4067/2025



$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 4067/2025, CRL.M.A. 36565/2025 PAWAN KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Samarth Krishan Luthra, DHCLSC, Advocate.

versus STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC for State with Mr Sangeet Sibou Mr Aniket Kumar Singh and Mr Priyansh Raj Singh Senger with SI Mohit Bansal.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 08.12.2025

1. A Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner to challenge the Order dated 09.10.2025 whereby the Parole sought by the Petitioner has been rejected and to further grant Parole for a period of eight weeks for filing the SLP before the Supreme Court and for maintaining social ties.

2. It is submitted that the Appeal bearing No.946/2023 against the Conviction and Sentence Order dated 02.08.2023 and 15.09.2023 was dismissed by this Court vide Order dated 14.08.2025, whereby the Conviction of the Petitioner under Section 342/365/506/376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act in FIR No.355/2017 P.S. Khyala was upheld.

3. The Petitioner had moved an Application dated 16.09.2025 seeking eight weeks Parole for filing the SLP, the Application has been dismissed on 09.10.2025 on the ground that the Applicant may jump the Parole as he has no permanent address in Delhi and also that the SLP can be preferred through his brother.

4. Learned ASC on behalf of the State has appeared and opposed the Applicant on the ground that eight weeks’ Parole is not mandated under the Jail Prison Rules and because he is convicted under POCSO Act, he is not entitled to any Parole.

Submissions heard and record perused

5. The Petitioner cannot be denied his right to avail the judicial remedy by way of SLP and the same cannot be relegated to be taken up by the brother or other family members. Considering the purpose for which the Parole has been sought and which is also for the purpose of establishing social ties, the impugned Order dated 09.10.2025 is hereby set aside and Parole for a period of four weeks is granted, on the following terms and conditions: -

i. The Petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent.

ii. The Petitioner shall report to the SHO of the local area once a week on every Sunday between 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM during the period of Parole.

iii. The Petitioner shall furnish a telephone/mobile number to the Jail Superintendent as well as SHO of local police station, on which he can he contacted, if required. The said telephone number shall be kept active and operational at all the times by the Petitioner.

iv. The Petitioner shall ordinarily reside at the address mentioned in the Petition.

v. Immediately upon the expiry of period of Parole, the Petitioner shall surrender before the Jail Superintendent.

vi. The period of Parole shall be counted from the day when the Petitioner is released from jail.

6. The Petition stands disposed of along with pending Application(s).

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

DECEMBER 8, 2025/va

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 Back to top