$~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2402/2025 PARVEEN KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Sowjhanya Shankaran (DHCLSC) with Mr. Akash Sachan, Ms. Anuka Bachawat and Ms. Charu Sinha, Advocates.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for the State with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Advocate.

SI Preeti and ASI Mukesh Kumar, P.S.: V. K. South.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 16.02.2026 CRL.M.A. 5170/2026 By way of the present application filed under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (‘BNSS’), the petitioner seeks early hearing of the writ petition, which is otherwise posted on

02.04.2026.

2. For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by affidavit, the application is allowed.

3. The writ petition is taken-up for hearing today.

4. Application stands disposed-of.

W.P.(CRL) 2402/2025

5. By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 528 of the BNSS, the petitioner impugns order dated 04.04.2025, whereby his application seeking parole has been rejected by the jail authorities.

6. The petitioner had sought parole on 02 counts: one, to repair his house in his native place; and two, to re-establish family ties.

7. Subsequently however, it transpired that the petitioner’s mother also fell seriously ill, requiring the petitioner to attend to her medical needs.

8. Though no formal notice was issued on the present petition, status reports dated 23.08.2025 and 26.08.2025 have been filed.

9. Ms. Sowjhanya Shankaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits, that though the petitioner’s mother is now doing relatively fine, the petitioner still needs to repair his house, which is in a dilapidated condition as would be seen from the photographs appended to status report dated 23.08.2025.

10. Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, learned ASC on behalf of the State submits, that as noted in the parole rejection letter, the petitioner’s house does not require repairing; and his overall conduct in jail has also been ‘unsatisfactory’ for which several prison punishments have been awarded to him.

11. It is noticed however, that a punishment ticket was awarded to the petitioner last in 2023, after which however this court has granted parole to the petitioner for a period of 04 weeks vidé order dated

30.05.2024.

12. As for the petitioner’s jail conduct, the nominal roll records that his jail conduct over the last 01 year has been ‘satisfactory’; and he has been serving as Ward Sahayak.

13. Insofar as the condition of the petitioner’s house is concerned, this court is of the view that the petitioner is correct in submitting that the house requires repair and restoration, which ground for parole is accordingly justified.

14. It is also noticed that the petitioner has already served more than 9½ years of custody, without counting remission; and though he was also been convicted for another offence committed in Haryana, he has already served the sentence for that offence.

15. Upon an overall conspectus of the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to grant to the petitioner – Parveen Kumar @ Chin s/o Sh. Zile Singh – parole for a period of 04 weeks, subject to the following conditions:

15.1. The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand Only) with 01 surety in the like amount from a family member, to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent;

15.2. While on parole, the petitioner shall not leave District Sonipat, Haryana, without prior permission of this court, except for travelling to-and-from prison in Delhi; and shall ordinarily reside at the address as per prison records/as mentioned in the petition;

15.3. The petitioner shall present himself before the S.H.O., P.S.:

Kharkhoda, Sonipat, Haryana every Friday between 11 am and 11:30 am to mark his presence. However, he will not be kept