LAWS(DLH)-2024-3-35

LAL MOHAMMED Vs. STATE

Decided On March 12, 2024
LAL MOHAMMED Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Sec. 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 certiorari quashing the order dtd. 4/9/2023 passed by the respondents and for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to release the petitioner on furlough for a period of three weeks.

(2.) The petitioner is presently confined in Central Jail No. 8/9 Tihar, Delhi. By virtue of judgment dtd. 30/7/2018 the petitioner was convicted under Ss. 506 Part-II of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') and Sec. 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act') in case arising out of FIR bearing No. 528/2012 registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Saket Courts, Delhi. His appeal against conviction i.e., CRL.A. 1065/2018 was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dtd. 24/10/2020.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner argues that the ground for rejection of the petitioner's application by the competent authority vide order dtd. 4/9/2023 is based on extraneous and irrelevant considerations and is liable to be set aside. It is submitted that the petitioner is a sole bread earner of his family consisting of his wife and seventeen years old daughter, who has cleared her 12th class examination and is pursuing her education. It is stated that the petitioner has arranged funds through his relatives to meet the educational requirements of his daughter. It is also stated that the competent authority despite there being no adverse report or punishment awarded to him throughout his period of incarceration has rejected the application. It is also argued that the conduct of the petitioner has remained satisfactory in jail and he has been working as Sahayak in Tailor Panja. It is further argued that as per catena of judgments of this Court as well as of the Hon'ble Apex Court it has been held that the release on parole/furlough is a valuable right of a convict and the same cannot be curtailed. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed that he be released on first spell of furlough for a period of three weeks.