Sunil Duggal vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 27 July, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sunil Duggal vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 27 July, 2021

Bench: Subramonium Prasad

$~54
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(CRL) 1298/2021
       SUNIL DUGGAL                                             ..... Petitioner
                          Through        Ms. Neha Kapoor, Advocate

                          versus

       STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                                 ..... Respondent
                     Through             Ms. Richa Kapoor, ASC for State
                                         with Ms. Surabhi Katyal and Ms.
                                         Shivani Sharma, Advocates

    CORAM:
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
            ORDER

% 27.07.2021 HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with the following prayers:

"a) Allow the present petition and grant parole to the Petitioner for a period of three months or in the alternative 2nd spell of furlough for a period of 2 weeks from 23.07.2021 in FIR No. 82/1989 U/s 30/498-A/34 IPC, P.S. Nabi Karim as his furlough is expiring on 23.07.2021 or for such period as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court;

b) Pass any other or further order that the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper as per the facts and circumstances of the case;"

2. On 23.07.2021, this Court had directed that the matter to be placed for hearing today, i.e. 27.07.2021 as the Status Report was not on record and the period of furlough was extended till 27.07.2021.

W.P.(CRL) 1298/2021 Page 1 of 4

3. Status Report has been filed. Rule 1210(V) of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, provides for a gap between two paroles and Rule 1212 of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, provides for a gap between one parole and furlough. Rule 1210(V) and Rule 1212 of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, reads as under:

"Gap between one Parole to another as per Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 • Rule 1210(V) of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, In order to be eligible for release on parole in terms of Rule above:-

"(V). A minimum of six months ought to have elapsed from the date of surrender on the conclusion of the previous parole availed. In emergency, parole may be considered even if minimum period of six months has not elapsed from the date of termination of previous Parole. The emergency may include delivery of a child by the wife of the convict, death of a family member, marriage of children, terminal illness of family members and natural calamities."

Gap between one Parole and Furlough as per Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 • Rule 1212 of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, is reproduced herein below:-

"1212. A convict would be released on parole for a period of maximum eight weeks in minimum two spells in a conviction year. However, the period of release in one spell should not be more than four weeks. There should be one month gap between parole and last furlough availed and vice-versa.

Note:-

(1) If the convict has applied for extension after surrendering from the original parole or his application for parole is W.P.(CRL) 1298/2021 Page 2 of 4 pending decision when he surrendered after availing original parole then his case will be considered as fresh case. (2) Simultaneous parole to co-accused is ordinarily not permissible, however, in exceptional circumstances competent authority may consider for reasons in writing for granting parole to co-accused who are family members."

4. A perusal of the above stated rules indicates that there is no rule which provides for a gap between two furloughs. The intention for the same seems to be that when a person is released on parole or furlough he has to surrender and only after a minimum gap of one month can a person be released again.

5. Ms. Neha Kapoor, learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the order dated 05.02.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.(CRL) 322/2019, wherein it was observed as under:

"No doubt in terms of Rule 1212 of Delhi Prison Rules 2018, the prisoner may be entitled for release on furlough/ parole only after one month gap between the last surrender and subsequent release on parole/ furlough availed, however, if in a given case there is some exigency, the petitioner cannot be denied release on parole/furlough immediately after availing the earlier parole/ furlough."

6. A perusal of the abovementioned paragraph indicates that this Court had exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the facts of that case.

7. In the instant petition, the petitioner was granted three weeks' furlough by the authorities vide order dated 24.05.2021 and the petitioner W.P.(CRL) 1298/2021 Page 3 of 4 was released on 01.07.2021. The period of three weeks was to expire on 23.07.2021. Along with the Status Report, the medical report of the petitioner has also been filed. The medical report of the petitioner shows that the petitioner is having some problems in his legs but he is not suffering from any serious medical problem.

8. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to exercise its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India granting parole to the Petitioner immediately on the expiry of the first furlough. The petitioner is, however, entitled to emergency parole after a period of one month.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would surrender today, i.e. 27.07.2021. The petitioner is, therefore, entitled to emergency parole only after 26.08.2021 and not earlier.

10. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J JULY 27, 2021 Rahul W.P.(CRL) 1298/2021 Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders