KALIM SHEIKH vs THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Reserved on: 27.02.2024
Pronounced on: 12.03.2024
+ W.P.(CRL) 3722/2023
KALIM SHIEKH ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dhan Mohan, Ms. Tanisha Bhatia and Ms. Anjali Pandey, Advocates
versus
STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) ….. Respondent
Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State with Mr. Alok Sharma and Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advocates and with Inspector Puneet Bharti with SI Abhishek, P.S. Khajuri Khas, Delhi.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
JUDGMENT
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.
1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C), has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to release the petitioner on parole for a period of one month.
2. The petitioner is presently confined in Central Jail No. 14, Mandoli, Delhi. The petitioner was convicted under Sections 302/363/364/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) in case arising out of FIR bearing No. 35/2018, registered at Police Station Khajuri Khas, Delhi and by virtue of order on sentence dated 06.12.2017,he was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (NDPS), North East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. His appeal against conviction i.e., CRL.A. 342/2018 was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 10.05.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed an SLP, bearing Diary No. 34273/2022, which was dismissed by the Honble Apex Court on 06.01.2023.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioners application for grant of parole has been rejected by the respondent vide order dated 04.09.2023, which is unjust, unfair and arbitrary. It is stated that the petitioner was enlarged on parole by this Court vide order dated 08.11.2019, and had surrendered late i.e. on 10.09.2021, however, for last more than two years, the conduct of the petitioner in the jail has been satisfactory not even a single punishment has been awarded to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner is the sole bread earner of his family, which comprises of his old aged ailing widow mother, wife and two minor children out of which one is girl and the other is boy. It is further stated that the address where the petitioner intends to stay during the period of parole has been verified by the State. It is, therefore, prayed that the petitioner be granted parole for a period of one month on the ground of releasing inner stress and for looking after his old aged widow mother.
4. Per Contra, learned ASC for the State opposes the present application and submits that the petitioner had been granted parole in the year 2019 by this Court, however, he had jumped the parole and had remained absconded for about 01 years and 07 months and had thereafter surrendered on 10.09.2021. It is further submitted that if the petitioner is released on parole, he may jump the same again. However, it is stated that the address of the sister of the petitioner has been verified and status report qua the same has already been filed on record.
5. This Court has heard arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned ASC for the State and has perused the material available on record.
6. The application filed by the petitioner for release on parole was rejected vide order dated 04.09.2023, by the respondent/competent authority, on the following one ground:
..Sir,
With reference to your office letter F.14/SCJ-14/AS(CT)/PAROLE/2023/4471dated 20.07.2023, on the subject cited above, I am to inform you that the request in respect of the above said convict for grant of parole has been considered and rejected by the Hon’ble Lt. Governor of Delhi in view of the followings: –
1. The convict is not entitled for parole in view of Rule 1210 sub rule (II) & (IV) of Delhi Prison Rules’2018, which states that: –
Rule 1210 sub rule (II): – “The conduct of the Prisoner who has been awarded major punishment for any prison offence should have been uniformly good for last two years from the date of application and the conduct of Prisoner who has been awarded minor punishment or no punishment for any prison offence in prison should have been uniformly good for last one year from the date of application”. In this case, punishment dated 10.09.2021 awarded to the above said convict is a major punishment as per Rule 1271 of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018.
1210 sub rule (IV):- “The convict should not have violated any terms and conditions of the parole or furlough granted previously”. In this case, the aforesaid convict was released on 03 weeks parole from 13.12.2019 to 02.01.2020 granted by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi and same was extended and surrender date was fixed from 23.01.2020. But he jumped the same and surrendered on 10.09.2021i.e. after 01 year, 07 months and 18 days.
2. Further, as per nominal roll, the overall jail conduct of the above said convict is reported to be unsatisfactory. The superintendent Jail has also not recommended grant of parole. to the above convict.
The convict may be informed accordingly.
7. Thus, the application for grant of parole filed by the petitioner has been rejected primarily on the ground that he had not surrendered on time when he was granted parole granted to him in the year 2019 and had then surrendered in the year 2021 as per the rejection order.
8. This Court has also gone through the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018. Rule 1197 and 1200 provide insight as to what objects are achieved by releasing a convict on parole. The said rules read as under:
1197. Parole and Furlough to inmates are progressive measures of correctional services. The release of prisoner on parole not only saves him from the evils of incarceration but also enables him to maintain social relations with his family and community. It also helps him to maintain and develop a sense of self-confidence. Continued contacts with family and the community sustain in him a hope for life. The release of prisoner on furlough motivates him to maintain good conduct and remain disciplined in the prison.
***
1200. The objectives of releasing a prisoner on parole and furlough are:
i.) To enable the inmate to maintain continuity with his family life and deal with familial and social matters,
ii. To enable him to maintain and develop his self- confidence,
iii. To enable him to develop constructive hope and active interest in life,
iv. To help him remain in touch with the developments in the outside world,
v. To help him remain physiologically and psychologically healthy,
vi. To enable him to overcome/recover from the stress and evil effects of incarceration, and vii. To motivate him to maintain good conduct and discipline in the prison…
9. While considering the present writ petition for grant of parole, the Court remains conscious of the fact that the petitioner has been awarded rigorous imprisonment for life and as per Nominal Roll on record, he has already remained in incarceration for more than 09 years and 04 months, excluding remission of about 01 years 09 months. Furthermore, the petitioners jail conduct for the last one year has also been satisfactory as per Nominal Roll. As regards the overall jail conduct of the petitioner, it is reported as unsatisfactory since he had jumped parole in the year 2019 and had surrendered in the year 2021 i.e. on 10.09.2021. However, this Court cannot overlook the fact that petitioner has already been awarded a punishment ticket for the said conduct, and two years and six months have already passed since then. The conduct of the petitioner in jail has been satisfactory for last two years and he has also not been awarded any punishment, and he has been working as a safai sahayk in the jail. The address of the sister of petitioner, where the petitioner to intends and undertakes to reside i.e. House no. 444, Gali no. 8, 5th Pusta, Gamri, Delhi, has been verified by the State.
10. In this Courts view, the reformative approach of the criminal law includes the incentive for good conduct of a prisoner and any order of disapproval or declining parole without appreciating the fact that the petitioner has maintained good conduct in the prison after his surrender would be against the said approach.
11. Thus, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant parole to the petitioner for a period of four (04) weeks, on the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/-, with one surety of the like amount, who shall be a family member, to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent.
ii. The petitioner shall report to the SHO of the local area once a week on every Sunday between 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM during the period of parole.
iii. The petitioner shall furnish a telephone/mobile number to the Jail Superintendent as well as SHO of local Police Station, on which he can he contacted, if required. The said telephone number shall be kept active and operational at all the times by the petitioner.
iv. Immediately upon the expiry of period of parole, the petitioner shall surrender before the Jail Superintendent.
v. The period of parole shall be counted from the day when the petitioner is released from jail.
12. In above terms, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
13. A copy of this order be sent by the Registry to the Jail Superintendent concerned.
14. The judgment be uploaded on the website forthwith.
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
MARCH 12, 2024/zp
W.P.(CRL.) 3722/2023 Page 1 of 7