Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Saurabh Sharma vs State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) on 31 May, 2021

Author: Mukta Gupta

Bench: Mukta Gupta

                              $~21

                              *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                              +      W.P.(CRL.) 1047/2021
                                     CRL.M.A. 8452/2021
                                     CRL.M.A.8453/2021

                                     SAURABH SHARMA                                    ..... Petitioner
                                             Represented by:           Mr.Akshay Bhandari, Advocate.

                                                          Versus

                                     STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI)                        .... Respondent
                                                     Represented by:   Ms.Richa Kapoor, ASC for the State.

                                     CORAM:
                                     HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
                                                          ORDER

% 31.05.2021 The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

CRL.M.A. 8452/2021

1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

2. Application is disposed of.

CRL.M.A. 8453/2021

1. Attested affidavits and Court fees/Welfare Stamps be filed within two weeks of the resumption of the normal Court functioning.

2. Application is disposed of.

W.P.(CRL.) 1047/2021

1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks emergency parole in case FIR No. 88/2007 under Section 364A IPC registered at P.S.Palam.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE W.P.(CRL.) 1047/2021 Page 1 of 3 MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:31.05.2021 23:39:40

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is covered under the guidelines laid down by the High Powered Committee in its meeting dated 4th May, 2021 as decided as item No. 5. He contends that the petitioner was declined emergency parole even last year which order was challenged before this Court and this Court granted emergency parole and hence, the petitioner would be covered under para 2 of the item No.5 of the Minutes of High Powered Committee's guidelines dated 4th May, 2021. Learned counsel further states that in any case, the petitioner has already been directed to be released on furlough and since, he has an order for grant of furlough in his favour, he is entitled to be released on emergency parole as per para 3 of item no. 5.

3. Notice. Ms.Richa Kapoor, learned Additional Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the State. On instructions, she states that last year, petitioner was not granted emergency parole but when filed a petition before this Court challenging the order of grant of emergency parole, he was granted parole simplicitor. However, the petitioner did not surrender in view of the decision of the Full Bench that the prisoners who are out on parole and bail, need not surrender at that stage.

4. This Court has perused the order dated 8th June, 2020 passed by this Court in W.P.(Crl.) 828/2020. Vide order dated 8th June, 2020, this Court did not grant emergency parole to the petitioner but granted parole for a period for six weeks with the direction to surrender on expiry of the said period from the date of his release. Thus, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though emergency parole was declined to the petitioner last year, but was granted by this Court, is incorrect.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE W.P.(CRL.) 1047/2021 Page 2 of 3 MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:31.05.2021 23:39:40

5. As regards the second ground for grant of emergency parole is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner states that since furlough has been granted in favour of the petitioner, the same be treated as emergency parole. He contends that once the furlough has been granted to him, the petitioner would be covered by the guidelines of HPC and thus, eligible for recommendation for grant of emergency parole.

6. Notice limited to the second contention of the petitioner is accepted by learned ASC for the State. Reply affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit within two weeks thereafter.

7. List on 27th July, 2021.

8. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

MAY 31, 2021/akb Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE W.P.(CRL.) 1047/2021 Page 3 of 3 MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:31.05.2021 23:39:40