W.P.(CRL) 42/2011 Page 1 of 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 42/2011 Decided on 11.02.2011 IN THE MATTER OF : LALIT KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. A.J.Bhambhani and Ms.Nisha Bhambhani, Advocates versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC CORAM * HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may No be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be No reported in the Digest? HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC praying inter alia for quashing of the orders dated 17.06.2010 & 1.9.2010 passed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of parole on the ground of non-verification of the address given by him. The petitioner has also sought his release for a period of three months to engage a counsel for drafting and filing a SLP in the Supreme Court against the judgment dated 11.02.2010 passed by a Division Bench in Crl.Appeal No.674/2005 arising out of FIR No.313/2003 under Sections 364A/34 IPC. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that under the impugned judgment, the trial court judgment has been upheld and the petitioner has W.P.(CRL) 42/2011 Page 2 of 3 been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of `2,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo RI for six months. 3. The nominal roll of the petitioner was called for. As per the said nominal roll, against a quantum of sentence of life imprisonment and a fine of `2,000/-in default, RI for six months, as on 11.12.2010, the petitioner had undergone a sentence of seven years, four months and nine days and earned remission for one year, nine months and five days. His jail conduct for the past one year is recorded as satisfactory and there is no other case pending against him. 4. Counsel for the petitioner states that the only ground for rejecting the application for parole was that the address given by him for verification was found not to exist. 5. A Status Report is handed over by the learned ASC for the State, wherein it is submitted that a visit was made to the permanent address of the petitioner at village Sirsor, PS Sanmera, Distt.Nalanda, Bihar and on verification, it is found that he and his father are permanent residents of the said village. As far as the Delhi address given by the petitioner is concerned, it was found that the brother of the petitioner has been residing at house No.2315, Gali No.4, New Oberoi Farm, Prem Chowk, Kapashera, Delhi for the last ten years and has also been running a small shop from the said address. 6. As the sole ground for rejection of the parole application of the petitioner was non-verification of the address which has now been verified and found to be correct, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to grant of parole for preferring a SLP in the Supreme Court against the W.P.(CRL) 42/2011 Page 3 of 3 impugned judgment dated 11.2.2010 passed in Crl.Appeal No.674/2005. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted parole for a period of four weeks, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of `10,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. (ii) The petitioner shall report to the SHO of local Police Station once a week on every Sunday at 10:00 AM and shall not leave the National Capital Territory of Delhi during the period of parole. (iii) The petitioner shall furnish a telephone number to the Jail Superintendent on which he can be contacted, if required. After his release, he shall also inform his telephone number to the SHO of the police station concerned. (iv) Immediately upon the expiry of period of parole, the petitioner shall surrender himself before the Jail Superintendent. (v) The petitioner shall furnish a copy of the SLP filed in the Supreme Court to the Superintendent Jail at the time of surrendering. (vi) The period of parole shall be counted from the day after the date when the petitioner is released from jail. 7. The petition is disposed of. DASTI. A copy of this order be forwarded by the Registry forthwith to the Superintendent Jail for information and perusal. (HIMA KOHLI) FEBRUARY 11, 2011 JUDGE mk