Delhi High Court: Accused Cannot Be Denied Right To File SLP On Ground Of Unsatisfactory Jail Conduct

The Delhi High Court in the case Vinod Kumar vs. State (GNCT Of Delhi) observed that the right to effectively pursue legal remedy by filing Special Leave Petition, SLP in the Supreme Court, which being the last hope for availing justice and it cannot be denied to an accused on the ground of ‘unsatisfactory conduct.’

The bench headed by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the case observed and has stated that such a right cannot be withheld or the remedy denied to an accused on the ground that free legal aid is available in the jail and SLP can be filed from there. The court stated that the courts have consistently emphasized that the right of a convict to file a Special Leave Petition challenging the dismissal of their criminal appeal by a High Court is crucial right and the said right cannot be denied based on the availability of free legal aid in jail and the possibility of filing the SLP from the jail premises.

The bench of Justice Sharma in the case observed and has granted parole of four weeks to an accused who challenged an order passed by the competent authority refusing to grant him parole for three months.

The court in the case observed and has pulled up the competent authority for passing the impugned order in a ‘mechanical manner’ and said that it had escaped the notice of the authority that the behaviour of the accused was satisfactory as per the nominal roll and no major or minor punishment was meted out to him after May 2017. Therefore, the authority in the case rejected the application for accused for release on parole on October 09. Thus, the same was done on the ground that his overall jail conduct, as per the nominal roll, was reported to be unsatisfactory and that he may file SLP from jail itself, where free legal aid facility is available to all prisoners. The court in the case observed that the accused was entitled to bail even as per rules.

The court stated that this court is of the opinion that the order impugned herein was an order passed in a mechanical manner, without appreciating the contents of nominal roll and the rules for grant of parole under the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018. The counsel, Advocates Mr. Piyush Bhardwaj & Mr. Rajat Rajoria Singh appeared for the Petitioner. The counsel, Advocates Mr. Jasraj Singh Chhabra & Mr. Amit Peswani, Advocates for Ms. Nadita Rao, ASC represented the (Criminal) for the State.