YOGESH BANSAL @ KAKE vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 08.05.2025 + W.P.(CRL) 1543/2025 & CRL.M.A. 14341/2025 YOGESH BANSAL @ KAKE .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Advocate. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for State with Inspector Sushil Sharma, PS Vijay Vihar. CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. Petitioner seeks to be released on parole in case FIR No. 499/2013 of PS Vijay Vihar for offence under Section 302/307 IPC and Section 25/27 Arms Act. 2. It is pointed out by learned ASC that the petitioner has concealed that his application for grant of furlough is already pending before another bench of this court vide W.P.(Crl.) 822/2025. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner does not dispute that he did not W.P.(CRL) 1543/2025 Page 1 of 2 pages GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.08 18:06:33 +05'30' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Date:08.05.2025 19:10:15 disclose about the pendency of furlough petition but submits that the two operate in different spheres. But in my considered view, the pendency of furlough petition ought to have been disclosed in the present petition. 4. The petitioner having concealed a relevant fact as mentioned above, the petition is liable to be summarily dismissed. But, in any case, decision of the competent authority is awaited. 5. Counsel for petitioner submits that he filed parole application before the Competent Authority on 01.05.2025. If that be so, the application be decided by the Competent Authority in accordance with law. 6. The petition is dismissed. Pending application stands disposed of. However, petitioner may again approach this court depending upon decision, or even indecision of the comp