The Delhi High Court in the case Ravi Kapoor v. State-NCT Of Delhi observed and has denied the parole to Ravi Kapoor, who is being convicted for the murder of journalist Soumya Vishwanathan and IT executive Jigisha Ghosh and the various other cases.
The bench headed by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the case observed and has dismissed the petition moved by Kapoor while taking into account his criminal history, the gravity of the offence committed by him and his overall conduct inside the premises of jail.
In the present case, Ravi Kapoor, who is currently serving life sentence in the cases, had moved the petition before the court seeking parole for four weeks on the ground of maintaining social ties with his family and for undergoing a knee surgery.
The court observed that when the petition is moved last year, he was undergoing life sentence in the murder case of Jigisha Ghosh in the year 2009.
Therefore, the trial court convicted him in July 2016 and was awarded death sentence. However, the said sentence was commuted to life sentence.
On the other hand, the State in the matter opposed the plea and submitted that during pendency of the writ petition, Kapoor was being convicted in another case of murdering journalist Soumya Vishwanathan in the year 2008.
The Trial Court in the case observed and has convicted him in October last year for the offence of murder and also under the stringent MCOCA.
The court observed that the status report indicated that Kapoor was involved in 20 other criminal cases, which includes the cases pertaining to murder, robbery, theft as well as offences under Arms Act.
The court stated while dismissing the plea that though the Supreme Court has emphasized the need to respect rights of the convicts of being released on parole but Courts are also bound to consider the counterbalancing public interest while deciding such kind of cases.
The court stated that neither any document or material in support of undergoing a knee surgery was placed on record by Kapoor, nor any arguments on the said aspect were addressed.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that the petitioner herein is a habitual offender, who has been involved in about 20 criminal cases between the period 2002 to 2010, and has been convicted in two cases involving commission of offences such as murder and robbery, and the most recent conviction being in October, 2023 and though his conduct inside jail remains satisfactory for last few years, the overall jail conduct has been unsatisfactory owing to as many as 41 major punishments being awarded to him.
The bench of Justice Sharma in the case clarified that the observations shall not influence the outcome of any future application wherein it seeks parole or furlough moved by Kapoor before competent authorities. Accordingly, the court dismissed the plea.
