Delhi High Court - Orders
Sunil Duggal vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 15 December, 2020
Author: Vibhu Bakhru
Bench: Vibhu Bakhru
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 2033/2020
SUNIL DUGGAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Siddharth Yadav, Advocate.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through: Mr Jamal Akhtar, Advocate for Mr
Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel for
State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
ORDER
% 15.12.2020
CRL.M.A. 16906/2020
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(CRL) 2033/2020
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that parole granted to the petitioner be extended for a further period of four weeks.
3. The petitioner was granted parole for a period of four weeks by the competent authority by an order dated 14.08.2020. However, he was released on parole on 15.11.2020. He had not been released earlier because his co-accused had been released and in terms of the order dated 14.08.2020 he could not be released until the co-accused surrendered. However, by an order dated 13.11.2020, the condition to the aforesaid effect was relaxed.
Signature Not Verified digitally signed by:DUSHYANT RAWALThe petitioner's period of parole expired yesterday. However, the same was extended till date by an ad interim order passed by this court on 09.12.2020.
4. It is pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the State that in terms of Rule 1212 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, the period of parole could not exceed four weeks. He submits that the maximum of eight weeks of parole in the minimum of two spells can be granted in a conviction year. It is further provided that there should be minimum period of thirty days gap between two spells of parole.
5. In view of the above, the decision of the concerned authority to reject the petitioner's prayer for extension of parole cannot be faulted.
6. However, this court considers it apposite to direct that if the petitioner surrenders on or before 18.12.2020, it would not be construed that he had overstayed his parole and the additional period beyond today would be considered as an extension of parole granted to him by virtue of this order.
7. The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.
8. The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the concerned jail authorities electronically.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J DECEMBER 15, 2020 MK Signature Not Verified digitally signed by:DUSHYANT RAWAL