Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Immediate Parole Application Post-Furlough Contravenes Rule 1212: Delhi HC Upholds Prison Regulations

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Delhi upheld stringent prison rules in the dismissal of a parole petition filed by Jeet Dahiya, emphasizing adherence to Rule 1212 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, which mandates a one-month gap between furlough and parole applications.

Presiding Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma rejected the plea under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stating that no sufficient grounds were presented to override the established prison guidelines. Convicted under severe charges including murder and illegal possession of arms, Dahiya sought parole to manage domestic responsibilities due to his wife’s engagement with her ailing mother.

Lodged in Central Jail No. 3, Tihar, Dahiya had recently benefited from a furlough ending on April 26, 2024, and subsequently applied for parole. The petition was grounded on the need to care for his minor children during his wife’s absence. The court, however, found this arrangement unnecessary as other family members were available to fulfill these roles.

Justice Sharma meticulously examined the conditions surrounding the parole request, emphasizing the violation of the prison rules meant to regulate the frequency of leaves granted to convicts. “As per Rule 1212 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, there has to be at least one month gap between parole and last furlough availed and vice versa,” the judge noted, establishing the basis for the petition’s dismissal.

Conclusion The decision highlights the judiciary’s firm stance on maintaining order and discipline within the penal system through strict compliance with procedural norms. This case serves as a precedent for future instances where convicts might seek similar relief under the prison rules.

Date of Decision: May 10, 2024

JEET DAHIYA vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Latest Legal News