Delhi High Court - Orders
Sukhvinder Kaur vs State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & Ors on 22 March, 2022
Author: Prateek Jalan
Bench: Prateek Jalan
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 201/2022
SUKHVINDER KAUR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate.
versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel
for R-1 with Mr. Karmjeet Sharma,
Advocate with SI Amit Kumar,
PS-Tilak Nagar.
Mr. Shashank Bajpai, Senior Panel
Counsel for UOI with
Mr.Shubhankar Singh, Advocate
for R-2 & 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ORDER
% 22.03.2022 The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through hybrid mode [physical and virtual hearing].
1. By way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents to release her on parole for a period of eight weeks.
2. The petitioner was convicted by the High Court of Negombo, Sri Lanka of offences under Section 54 (A, B, C) of the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Act in case No. HC/243/11, decided on 18.11.2015.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:22.03.2022 21:01:54 W.P.(CRL) 201/2022 Page 1 of 5She was sentenced to two life imprisonments. As the petitioner is a citizen and resident of India, she was thereafter repatriated under Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003 and is serving her sentence in Tihar Jail, Delhi. Her application for parole has been rejected by the Government of NCT of Delhi ["GNCTD"] by an order dated 21.12.2021 [Annexure A-5 to the petition]. Two grounds are mentioned in the order:
(a) that she has misbehaved with the jail staff on 21.09.2021 and is thus disentitled to parole under Rule 1210 (II) of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 ["Rules"]; and (b) that having been convicted under the Dangerous Drugs Act, she is not ordinarily entitled to parole under Rule 1211 of the Rules.
3. Mr. Ajay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is now approximately 54 years of age and has strong family ties, having a son and a daughter, who are also resident in Delhi. Mr. Verma points out that the petitioner has been granted parole on two occasions in the past - by an order of this Court dated 14.10.2020 in W.P.(CRL) 1070/2020, and by an order of the GNCTD dated 04.02.2021. On both occasions, the petitioner complied with the conditions of parole and surrendered on expiry thereof.
4. Mr. Sanjay Lao, learned Standing Counsel for the GNCTD, has handed over a status report in Court, a copy whereof is taken on record. He submits that the address of the petitioner [B-32, Vishnu Garden near Mangal Bazaar Road, Tilak Nagar, Delhi] has been verified. The said property belonged to the petitioner's father and has devolved upon the petitioner by inheritance. The petitioner's son, namely Sahib Singh, is residing at this address.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that this is a fit Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:22.03.2022 21:01:54 W.P.(CRL) 201/2022 Page 2 of 5 case for the petitioner to be released on parole. She evidently has family in Delhi, including a son, and a daughter. Her son is resident in the same house. Mr. Verma states that the petitioner's daughter is married and also resident in her matrimonial home in Delhi. The purpose of parole being to enable prisoners to maintain their family ties, I see no reason to deprive the petitioner of that opportunity.
6. The nominal roll filed by the jail authorities reflects that the petitioner has completed 12 years 9 months and 10 days of her sentence, as on 17.03.2022. She has been working in the jail as night langar sahayak. Although there is a remark that she misbehaved with jail staff on 21.09.2021 for which she was heard and warned, the jail authorities have characterised her jail conduct for the last one year as "satisfactory". The nominal roll also indicates that the petitioner was granted parole on two occasions as submitted by Mr. Verma above and has surrendered in time on both occasions.
7. In the status report, the address of the petitioner has already been verified and the petitioner's son is also found to be residing at the address. Sub-Inspector Amit Kumar from Police Station Tilak Nagar, who is present in Court, states that the brother of the petitioner also resides on the first floor of the property.
8. As far as the objections taken in the order of the GNCTD dated 21.12.2021 are concerned, I find that neither of the objections are sustainable in these circumstances. The petitioner's conduct for the last one year having been found satisfactory by the jail authorities, despite the remark regarding misbehaviour on 21.09.2021, for which she was warned, there is no occasion for the Government to invoke Rule 1210 (II) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:22.03.2022 21:01:54 W.P.(CRL) 201/2022 Page 3 of 5 of the Rules in this case. Similarly, the objection relating to Rule 1211, does not survive for consideration, in view of the fact that the petitioner has been released on parole on two occasions, including by the GNCTD itself vide order dated 04.02.2021.
9. For the reasons aforesaid, the petition is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner be released on parole for a period of 30 days from the date of her release (being the maximum period provided under the Rules), upon the following terms and conditions:-
a. The petitioner will furnish a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of ₹25,000/- each, from family members including at least one blood relative of the petitioner, to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent. b. The petitioner will not leave the National Capital Region of Delhi without permission of the Court.
c. The petitioner will reside at the address mentioned in the jail records namely, B-32, Vishnu Garden near Mangal Bazaar Road, Tilak Nagar, Delhi.
d. The petitioner will report to the Station House Officer, Police Station Tilak Nagar, every Monday between 11:00AM to 11:30AM, to mark her presence.
e. The petitioner will provide a mobile/telephone number to the SHO, Police Station Tilak Nagar on which she may be contacted at any time. She will ensure that the number is kept active and switched on at all times.
f. The petitioner will not indulge in any unlawful act or omission. g. The petitioner will surrender to the Jail Superintendent upon expiry Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:22.03.2022 21:01:54 W.P.(CRL) 201/2022 Page 4 of 5 of the period of parole.
10. A copy of this order be communicated electronically forthwith to the concerned Jail Superintendent for information.
11. Order dasti.
PRATEEK JALAN, J MARCH 22, 2022 'pv'/ Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:22.03.2022 21:01:54 W.P.(CRL) 201/2022 Page 5 of 5