IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No. _____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXXX                          : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXX      : RESPONDENT

I N D E X

DELHI                                                                    FILED BY  

DATED :              

XXXXX, XXXXX&

XXXXX

COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONER

Office: XXXXX

XXXXX

Mob.No. +91-XXXXX

Email: XXXXXXX

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M.A. NO. ________ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION NO. XXXX OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF: -

XXXXX: PETITIONERS

VERSUS

XXXXX      : RESPONDENT

NOTICE OF MOTION

To

XXXXX

Through XXXX,

XXXXX

XXXXXX

Sir,

          The enclosed Crl. Writ Petition / Application in the aforesaid writ petition as being filed on behalf of the PETITIONER and is likely to be listed on ….. October, 2024 or any date, thereafter. Please take notice accordingly.

DELHI                                                                    FILED BY

DATED :              

XXXXX, XXXXX&

XXXXX

COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONER

Office: XXXXX

XXXXX

Mob.No. +91-XXXXX

Email: XXXXXXX

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No. _____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXXX                          : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXX      : RESPONDENT

URGENT APPLICATION

To,

          The Hon’ble Joint Registrar,

          Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.

          New Delhi. 

Sir,

          Will you kindly treat the accompanying writ petition / application as urgent one in accordance with the provision of as per the Delhi High Court rules and regulations and orders.

The grounds of urgency are as set out in the accompanying petition / application.

Yours faithfully,

DELHI                                                                    FILED BY

DATED :              

XXXXX, XXXXX&

XXXXX

COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONER

Office: XXXXX

XXXXX

Mob.No. +91-XXXXX

Email:XXXXXX

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No. _____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXXX                          : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXX      : RESPONDENT

MEMO OF PARTIES

MR. XXXXX

S/o XXXX

R/o XXXXXX

XXXXXX

Through his Perokar XXXXX

S/o Sh. XXX, R/o XXXXX       : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXXX

XXXXX

XXXXXX                       : RESPONDENT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DELHI                                                                    FILED BY

DATED :              

XXXXX, XXXXX&

XXXXX

COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONER

Office: XXXXX

XXXXX

Mob.No. +91-XXXXX

Email: XXXXXX

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. WRIT PETITION No. _____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

MR. XXXXX

S/o XXXX

R/o XXXXX

XXXXX

Through his Perokar Mr. XXXX

S/o XXXXXX

XXXXXX.  : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXXX

Through XXXXX,

XXXXX,

XXXXX

.                                       : RESPONDENT

CRIMINAL WRIT PEITION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF BNSS SEEKING QUASHING OF ONE-YEAR SENTENCE EXTENSION IMPOSED ON THE PETITIONER DUE TO AN UNINTENTIONAL DELAY IN SURRENDER AND FURTHER DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT AS WELL AS SENTENCE REVIEW BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION OF PREMATURE RELEASE UNDER POLICY DATED 16.07.2004.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-

1.              That the Petitioner has sought to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of BNSS seeking quashing of one-year sentence extension imposed on the Petitioner due to an unintentional delay in surrender and further direction to the Respondent as well as Sentence Review Board for consideration of premature release under Policy dated 16.07.2004.

2.              That the Respondent is the Instrumentality’s of the State within the meaning of Article 12 of Constitution of India and does amenable to the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

3.              That the Petitioner was convicted under Section 307 IPC in FIR No.XXX/2010, registered at XXXXX. The petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment and has already undergone 12.8 years of actual imprisonment and 14.6 years including remission.

4.              That the present case of the Petitioner for premature release falls under the Policy dated 16.07.2004, passed by XXXXXX, which governs the premature release of prisoners convicted before the introduction of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018. As per this policy, convicts undergoing life imprisonment shall be eligible for premature release after completing 14 years of actual imprisonment. Copy of Policy Dated 16.07.2004 as Annexure P-1.

5.              That the Petitioner is not covered by Section 433A Cr.P.C., and he is therefore not subjected to the provisions requiring a minimum of 20 years for certain heinous offenses. The Petitioner is eligible for release under the first category, which requires 14 years of actual sentence without remission.

6.              That despite having completed the requisite period of sentence under the said policy, the Petitioner remains incarcerated, and no steps have been taken by the Sentence Review Board (SRB) to finalize his premature release, despite the direction of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 24.01.2024. The Petitioner and others were included in a collective Writ Petitions bearing No.3426/2023 filed before this Hon'ble Court, where multiple petitioners sought relief under the policy dated 16.07.2004. Copy of Order dated 24.01.2024 as Annexure P-2.

7.              That on 24.01.2024 this Hon'ble Court directed that the Petitioner be considered / reconsidered by the Sentence Review Board for premature release, in terms of the policy dated 16.07.2004, within a period of eight weeks from today. It is further directed that the order of the Sentence Review Board shall be uploaded within a period of one week after it is approved by the approving Authority. Despite this clear direction by the Hon’ble Court, the Sentence Review Board has failed to comply with the order. No decision has been communicated to the Petitioner, and no updates have been provided regarding the status of his premature release. This continued delay is in blatant violation of the Court’s order, and the Petitioner remains in prison despite being legally entitled to premature release.

8.              That the Petitioner has consistently demonstrated good conduct while in prison, as evidenced by the fact that he has been granted furlough multiple times, with the last furlough granted on 09.11.2023 to 30.11.2023, and Petitioner also donated his one kidney and completed his education from the Jail and he has got the offer letter from private company for job during this period. This clearly indicates the behavior of the Petitioner in jail has been satisfactory ​and clean. Copy of Letter of Appreciation along with Job Letter as Annexure P-3 (Colly).

9.              That the Petitioner after the passing of order dated 24.01.2024 has also filed Special Leave Petition bearing no.1985-1987/2024 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court seeking stay of surrender before the Jail till disposal of Pre-mature release petition pending before State Review Board, the Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased to grant Stay on the Surrender of the Petitioner, however the same was vacated vide order dated 01.10.2024. Copy of Order Dated 01.10.2024 as Annexure P-4.

10.           That thereafter being a law-abiding citizen, the Petitioner has surrender himself before the Jail on 05.10.2024, immediately after uploading the order dated 01.10.2024 on the official website of Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is not out of place to mention here that the Petitioner also sent an email dated 04.10.2024 thereby making inquiry about his status for surrender before the jail which was duly answered by the Jail Authority on 05.10.2024. Copy of email dated 04.10.2024 and its reply dated 05.10.2024 are annexed as Annexure P-6(Colly).

11.           That the Jail Authority informed the Petitioner that Sentence Review Board rejected this consideration for him and 78 others vide order dated 15.10.2024 as stated in letter dated 18.10.2024 from the Respondent, and the Jail Authority due minor delay of 4 days in surrender as a reason added the one year more sentence as a penalty. It is pertinent to mentioned herein that the Petitioner was on furlough, extended by the Hon’ble Supreme Court until the disposal of his premature release application. When the Supreme Court order vacated the stay on 01.10.2024, the Petitioner immediately attempted to surrender. Due to a delay in availability of the order, he was able to surrender only on 05.10.2024, despite his prompt actions, which included sending an email to the jail authorities for confirmation. Copy of Letter dated 18.10.2024 along with list of rejection of premature release are annexed as Annexure P-7(Colly).

12.           That the petitioner also approached to the Hon’ble High Court by filing Crl. M.A. in Writ Petition bearing No.XXX/2023 for direction to Respondent for comply the order dated 24.01.2024 of premature release of the petitioner, but same was withdrawn on 21.10.2024 when the Petitioner came to know about the rejection of premature release of the Petitioner by the Sentence Review Board/ Respondent.

GROUNDS:-

A.             Because the decision of Jail Authority to extend the Petitioner’s sentence by one year due to a four-days delay in surrender is arbitrary and disproportionate. The delay in surrender was unintentional and due to genuine unavailability of the order dated 01.10.2024 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court which uploaded on 05.10.2024, after knowing the status of his extension of furlough was rejected the Petitioner immediately surrender himself on the same day before the Jail Authority, for which he cannot be penalized under Article 21 of the Constitution.

B.             Because the non-compliance with direction of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 24.01.2024 by the Sentence Review Board and its arbitrary refusal to consider the premature release of the Petitioner despite eligibility under the 2004 policy violates his rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, resulting in continued unlawful detention. Kuldeep & Ors. vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi): Demonstrates similar relief granted to convicts eligible under the 2004 policy, reinforcing Petitioner’s claim for premature release.

C.             Because the Petitioner has demonstrated reformation through his impeccable conduct in jail. He has made significant contributions, including donating an organ, pursuing his education, and securing employment offers as a reformed individual. Such conduct is in alignment with the 2004 policy requirements, where good conduct is a critical factor in premature release. In the State of Haryana vs. Jagdish (2010): Emphasizes that the policy most beneficial to the convict at the time of conviction should apply, supporting Petitioner’s eligibility under the 2004 policy.

D.             Because the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted relief to similarly situated convicts in several writ petitions, ordering their premature release under the policy dated 16.07.2004. The petitioner’s case is on the same footing as those where exemptions from surrendering have been granted. In Kuldeep & Ors. Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (W.P. Crl. No. 142/2023): The Hon’ble Supreme Court granted exemptions from surrendering to similarly situated convicts under the 16.07.2004 policy.

E.              Because the Sentence Review Board repeated refusal to consider the case of the Petitioner on the grounds of the nature of the offense is in contradiction to the 16.07.2004 policy. The policy prioritizes good conduct and time served over the nature of the crime. K. Ramachandra Reddy vs. State of Karnataka (2002): Affirms that non-compliance with Court orders amounts to a serious violation of the rule of law and could lead to contempt proceedings against the non-complying authority.

F.              Because the petitioner is trying to reform himself with the main stream of society as the petitioner was deprived for the love and affection towards his family members and society and there is no complaint against him after his release on furlough and petitioner undertake that he will not harass any one and no complaint of any kind will be received against him.

G.             Because the conduct of the Petitioner in the Jail is never found objectionable by the Jail authorities, except one minor incident in 2016, not even a single punishment has been given to the Petitioner during his period of incarceration. Sunil Fulchand Shah vs. Union of India (2000): Highlights the role of good conduct in parole and premature release considerations, a crucial factor in this case as the Petitioner has displayed exemplary behavior in prison.

13.     That the petitioner has not filed any other similar writ petition seeking same relief either before this Hon’ble Court or before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

- : P R A Y E R :-

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may pleased to :

(a)            Issue a writ of certiorari or any appropriate direction to set aside the arbitrary one-year extension of sentence imposed on the Petitioner by the Jail Authority due to the minor and unintentional delay in surrender, during furlough.

(b)           Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent / Sentence Review Board to comply with the direction of order dated 24.01.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition bearing No.3426/2023, and to consider and finalize the Petitioner’s case for premature release in strict accordance with the policy dated 16.07.2004, without further delay;

(c)            Direct the Respondent to release the Petitioner forthwith under the 2004 policy, acknowledging the time already served and his demonstrated reformation and eligibility for premature release.

(d)           Any such further orders may deem fit to this Hon’ble Court be passed in the interest of justice.

DELHI                                                          PETITIONER

THROUGH

DATED :              

XXXXX, XXXXX&

XXXXX

COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONER

Office: XXXXX

XXXXX

Mob.No. +91-XXXXX

Email:XXXXX

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. MISC. APP. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No. _____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXXX                          : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXX      : RESPONDENT

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILLING CERTFIED COPIES OF THE ANNEXXURES.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH ;-

1.       That the applicant / petitioner has filed Annexures along with the main writ petition application in order to support the petition and the Annexures filed is the true, correct and compared copies of the original.

2.      That the petitioner shall apply for obtaining the certified copies of the Annexures and undertakes to file the same as soon as the same is made available by copying agency concerned.

It is most respectfully prayed that the petitioner may kindly be exempted from filling the certified copies of the Annexures.

Such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may be deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be also passed to meet the ends of justice.

It is prayed accordingly.                                                    

DELHI                                                          PETITIONER

THROUGH

DATED :              

XXXXX, XXXXX&

XXXXX

COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONER

Office: XXXXX

XXXXX

Mob.No. +91-XXXXX

Email: XXXXXXXX

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI.

CRL. WRIT PETITION No. _____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXXX                          : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXX      : RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of XXXXX, aged about XX years, S/o XXX, R/o  XXXXX  do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -

1.       That I am the Perokar / Friend of the petitioner in the above noted case and am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case as such am competent to swear this affidavit.

2.       That the contents of the accompanying Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of BNSS have been read over and explained to me in vernacular and having understood the same I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

3.       That the facts as stated above in the Affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

Verified at Delhi on this ___ day of October, 2024. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI.

CRL. M.C. NO. _____ OF 2024.

IN

CRL. WRIT PETITION No. _____ OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :-

XXXXX                          : PETITIONER

VERSUS

XXXXX      : RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of XXXX, aged about XX years, S/o XXX, R/o XXXXXX, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -

1.       That I am the Perokar/Friend of the petitioner in the above noted case and am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case as such am competent to swear this affidavit.

2.       That the petitioner has gone through the averments made in the accompanying application filed under Section 528 of BNSS seeking exemption to filling certified copies and submits that this application had been drafted by my counsel on my instructions and explained to me in vernacular and having understood the same.

3.       I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION: -

I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify that the facts stated in the above Affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this ____, day of October, 2024.

DEPONENT