Sunil Kumar Vs State (Nct of Delhi) — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sunil Kumar Vs State (Nct of Delhi) — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order set aside; petitioner directed to be released on furlough for three weeks subject to a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount, restriction on leaving the National Capital Region without informing the local SHO, provision of a constantly switched-on mobile phone number, and written intimation by the Jail Superintendent of the surrender date.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose request for first spell of furlough was rejected on 06.03.2025 on account of his belated surrender after a previous furlough spell, deserves to be released on furlough.

Court's answer

In light of the judicial precedents in similar situations (annexed as Annexure P4) and keeping in mind the basic reformatory philosophy, the petitioner deserves to be released on furlough.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is allowed; the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is directed to be released on furlough for three weeks, subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount, not leaving the National Capital Region without informing the local SHO, providing a constantly switched-on mobile phone number to the SHO, and with the Jail Superintendent to inform him in writing of the surrender date.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Justice Girish Kathpalia, oral judgment, 16.05.2025) allowed W.P.(CRL) 919/2025 filed by Sunil Kumar against State (NCT of Delhi). The competent authority had on 06.03.2025 rejected the petitioner's request for a first spell of furlough because, on an earlier furlough (released 27.03.2024, due to surrender 10.04.2024), he had surrendered belatedly on 08.10.2024 despite a Supreme Court direction of 01.10.2024 to surrender immediately. Relying on judicial precedents annexed as Annexure P4 and the basic reformatory philosophy, the Court held the petitioner deserved furlough, set aside the impugned order, and directed his release on furlough for three weeks on a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount, subject to not leaving the National Capital Region without informing the local SHO, keeping a mobile phone number constantly switched on, and written intimation of the surrender date by the Jail Superintendent.

$~14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 16.05.2025

W.P.(CRL) 919/2025

SUNIL KUMAR .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Advocate

versus

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Arjit Sharma, Advocate with Inspector Arun, PS Prasad Nagar

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

The petitioner has assailed order dated 06.03.2025 of the competent authority whereby his request for first spell of furlough was rejected on the ground that on the earlier occasion, on being released on furlough, he surrendered belatedly after eight days of the due date of surrender.

Learned counsel for respondent has submitted the status report and nominal roll which are accepted across the board to be scanned and made part of the record.

There appears to be no serious objection to the present petition.

W.P. (Crl.) 919/2025

Page 1 of 2 pages

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.16 17:50:28 +05'30'

GIRISH KATHPALIA

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Da te:1 6.05.2025 18:50:15

It appears that the petitioner was released on furlough on 27.03.2024 and was scheduled to surrender on 10.04.2024. On 01.10.2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court disposed of his petition, directing him to surrender immediately but he surrendered belatedly on 08.10.2024.

Learned counsel for petitioner has taken me through the judicial precedents in similar situation, annexed as Annexure P4. In the light of the said precedents and keeping in mind the basic reformatory philosophy, the petitioner deserves to be released on furlough.

Under these circumstances, the petition is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and petitioner is directed to be released on furlough for a period of three weeks subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent and also subject to the condition that he shall not leave the National Capital Region without informing the local SHO, to whom he shall provide his mobile phone number, which mobile phone number shall be kept constantly switched on. At the time of releasing the petitioner on furlough, the Jail Superintendent shall inform him in writing the date on which he has to surrender. Copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendent for necessary compliance.

GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.16 17:50:48 +05'30'

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

MAY 16, 2025/ as

W.P. (Crl.) 919/2025

Page 2 of 2 pages

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Da te:1 6.05.2025 18:50:15