IRSHAD @ BABLOO Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks release on first spell of furlough on furnishing cash surety instead of individual surety. In response to the petition, multiple status reports were filed on behalf of State, opposing the petition. I have heard learned counsel for both sides.

(2.) Briefly stated, vide order dtd. 1/10/2024 of the competent authority, the petitioner was granted relief of first spell of furlough in case FIR No. 694/2016 of PS Bhalaswa Dairy for offence under Sec. 302/147/ 148/149/34 IPC. By way of the said order, petitioner was directed to be released on furlough subject to certain conditions, one of which was to furnish surety of Rs.10,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount. Since petitioner was unable to arrange a surety, he moved an application before the competent authority for accepting cash surety instead of individual surety but that request was declined vide order dtd. 28/11/2024 for the reason that he is serving life sentence and has large sentence to undergo.

(3.) In one of the status reports, the respondent had enlisted a number of relatives of the petitioner and learned ASC contends that any of them can be produced as surety by the petitioner. In response, learned counsel for petitioner contends that none of those relatives is ready to stand as surety, otherwise there was no reason for the petitioner to continue in jail without availing the benefit of furlough.