Ikram vs State of Haryana and others

Rameshwar Singh Malik, J.—Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an appropriate writ to the respondents, particularly respondent no. 2, to consider the request of the petitioner for release on emergency parole, in view of the judgement of this Court dated 6.1.2012 passed in Crl. W.P. No. 2156 of 2011 (Noordin Vs. State of Haryana and another). Notice of motion.

On the asking of the court, Mr. Anupam Sharma, AAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the application of the petitioner dated 28.8.2012 (Annexure P-2) is pending decision before respondent no. 2. He further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, in case respondent no. 2 is directed to consider the genuine request of the petitioner, in view of the judgement of this Court in Noordin''s case (supra).

Having heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is just and expedient to direct respondent no. 2, to consider the grievance of the petitioner, which prima facie seems to be genuine.

In view of the above and to secure the ends of justice, Superintendent, District Jail, Faridabad, is directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner, already raised vide his representation dated 28.8.2012 (Annexure P-2), in view of the judgement of this Court in Noordin''s case (supra) (Annexure P-5), dispassionately and expeditiously, passing an appropriate order thereon, in accordance with law. With the observations made above, the present petition stands disposed of.