Om Prakash Chautala vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 11 April, 2017

2. Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge had granted parole
to the appellant for a period of three weeks by an order of 06.02.2017.
However, on a complaint received by Hon’ble the Chief Justice, Delhi
High Court that the order granting parole was being misused, the
learned Single Judge took up the matter, issued notice to the appellant,
thereafter heard arguments and recalled the order granting parole.

3. Learned Senior counsel submits that the question of furlough was not
a subject-matter before the learned Single Judge at the time of grant of
parole on 06.02.2017; neither it was a subject-matter before the
learned Single Judge when arguments were heard seeking cancellation
of the order dated 06.02.2017. Mr.Nandrajog further submits that the
order by which parole was granted could not have been recalled by the
learned Single Judge, as the order was not misused, and the grant of
parole and furlough is a right of every convict.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply