Disposed¶7

Sharda Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC3 Dec 2025W.P.(CRL)/3998/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Furlough rejection sent back for fresh consideration: Delhi HC directs respondents to re-decide application within 2 weeks, ignoring late surrender and AGCR shortfall. Keywords: furlough; parole; 'Heard & Warned' minor penalty; AGCR / Annual Good Conduct Remission; three consecutive AGCRs; late surrender 24.11.2024 (1 month 23 days); rejection order F.10(003742625)/CJ/Legal/PHQ/2025/6928 dated 17.10.2025; good conduct one year prior to application; Sharda Jain; State of NCT of Delhi; W.P.(CRL) 3998/2025; Amit Mahajan, J; 03.12.2025; High Court of Delhi; disposed with directions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent authorities to decide the petitioner's furlough application afresh within a period of two weeks, without being influenced by her belated surrender or her not having three AGCRs. ¶7

Sharda Jain Vs State of NCT of Delhi — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner was entitled to release on furlough notwithstanding her late surrender from an earlier furlough (which attracted a 'Heard & Warned' minor penalty and cost her the 2024 AGCR), i.e., whether she had shown good conduct for a continuous period of one year prior to her application. +1 more

¶3

Court's answer

At the time of rejection there was no infirmity in the order refusing furlough, since the petitioner had not shown good conduct for a period of one year — one year had not elapsed between her late surrender on 24.11.2024 and the rejection dated 17.10.2025.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

By the date the petition was heard, more than one year had elapsed since the petitioner's late surrender from furlough, and the respondent authorities had mentioned no reason other than that late surrender for not allowing her release on furlough.

¶6

Key takeaways

The petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to decide the petitioner's furlough application afresh within two weeks, without being influenced by her belated surrender or her not having three AGCRs.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Amit Mahajan, J.), W.P.(CRL) 3998/2025 — Sharda Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi (order dated 03.12.2025). The petitioner's furlough application had been rejected by order no. F.10(003742625)/CJ/Legal/PHQ/2025/6928 dated 17.10.2025 solely on account of her earlier late surrender from furlough — she surrendered 1 month and 23 days late, on 24.11.2024 — which drew a 'Heard & Warned' minor penalty and cost her the 2024 AGCR, leaving her without three consecutive AGCRs. The Court found no infirmity in the rejection as it stood, since a convict must show good conduct for a continuous period of one year prior to applying and one year had not then elapsed since the late surrender. Observing that more than one year had elapsed by the date of hearing and that no other ground for refusal was stated, the Court disposed of the petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to decide the application afresh within two weeks, uninfluenced by the belated surrender or the shortfall of three AGCRs.

¶1

$~78

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 3998/2025 SHARDA JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhinav Sekhri & Mr. Aru Vashisht, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State with Ms. Sakshi Jha, Adv. SI Mukul Yadav, PSKeshav Puram

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R % 03.12.2025

¶8

The present petition is filed challenging the order no. F.10(003742625)/CJ/Legal/PHQ/2025/6928 dated 17.10.2025 passed by the respondent authorities thereby rejecting the petitioner’s application for furlough.

¶9

The petitioner had filed an application for grant of furlough before the respondent authorities. The same was rejected for the reason that, on an earlier occasion, when she was released on furlough, had not surrendered on time for which she was awarded the penalty of ‘Heard & Warned’ . Further it was noted that the petitioner did not have three consecutive Annual Good Conduct Remissions (‘ AGCR ’), since she had not earned AGCR in 2024 due to her late surrender.

¶10

It is not disputed that the penalty of ‘Heard & Warned’ is a minor penalty and that the convict can only seek his release on parole or furlough if his conduct is good for a continuous period

¶11

This is a digitally signed order.

¶12

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/12/2025 at 13:11:11

¶13

of one year prior to his application.

¶14

The petitioner, when released on furlough on an earlier occasion, had surrendered 1 month and 23 days late, on 24.11.2024. Importantly, when the petitioner’s application seeking furlough was rejected by order dated 17.10.2025, a period of one year had not elapsed.

¶15

Thus, I find no infirmity in the order rejecting the petitioner’s application seeking furlough since she had not shown good conduct for a period of one year. 6. However, at this stage, when the present petition is taken up, more than one year has elapsed since the petitioner had surrendered late from furlough. No other reason has been mentioned by the respondent authorities for not allowing the petitioner’s application for release on furlough apart from her aforesaid late surrender.

¶16

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent authorities to decide the petitioner’s application afresh within a period of two weeks without being influenced by her belated surrender or not having three AGCRs.

¶17

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

¶18

DECEMBER 3, 2025 “SS”

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/12/2025 at 13:11:11

Sharda Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharda Jain v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamal Pathak & Ors. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Kamla Devi Dalal & Anr. Vs Jyoti Malik

Tripti Chauhan Vs the State of NCT Delhi & Anr.

Venkateshwar Hospital and Anr. Vs State of NCT Delhi and Anr.

Ashok & Ors. Vs the State Govt of N.C.T of Delhi & Anr.

Rahul & Anr. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Surender Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Aniket Dey Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Marham @ Salma Vs the State NCT of Delhi

Mahesh Chugh Vs State of NCT of Delhi

M/S Qureshi Mutton and Chicken Shop Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Vakil Ray Vs the State(Nct of Delhi)

Gurjeet Singh Vs Rahul Vij & Anr.

Mohd Shuaib & Ors. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.