$~107 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 4171/2025 SONU @ HEMRAJ .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhinav Sekhri, Adv.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC (Crl.) with Mr.

Sangeet Sibou, Mr. Aniket Kumar Singh and Mr. Harsh Kumar, Advs. for State with S.I. Raghuraj Singh, P.S. Sangam Vihar, New Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 17.12.2025 CRL.M.A. 37645/2025 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 4171/2025

3. The present petition has been filed assailing the order dated 06.08.2025 whereby the petitioner’s application for grant of furlough has been declined on the ground that the petitioner was released on emergency parole w.e.f. 01.06.2021 to 07.04.2023 but he did not surrender on time and was re-arrested by Crime Branch on 24.06.2024.

4. Mr. Abhinav Sekhri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that after the said order, this Court vide order dated 16.10.2025 passed in W.P.(Crl.) 3607/2024, released the petitioner on parole for a period of four weeks.

5. He submits that the delayed surrender was during the Covid time and since considerable number of convicts were released on emergency parole and the same was being extended from time to time, the petitioner lost track of extensions, as well as, the date of surrender. He submits that in any case, the delay was for a period of two months.

6. He invites attention of the Court to the nominal roll to contend that the overall jail conduct of petitioner, as well as, conduct during last one year, is satisfactory.

7. He further contends that on account of delayed surrender in June, 2023, the petitioner has been warned and in view of the decision of this Court, the warning shall not come in the way of granting furlough to a convict. He places reliance on a decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jitender @ Kala v. State of NCT of Delhi [W.P.(Crl.) 1563/2025;

date of decision : 08.07.2025].

8. In view of the above, issue notice.

9. Mr. Rahul Tyagi, Additional Standing Counsel (Criminal) accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/State.

10. Having heard learned counsels for the parties, this Court finds that after passing of the impugned order dated 06.08.2025, the petitioner has already been granted parole by this Court vide order dated 16.10.2025 passed in W.P.(Crl.) 3607/2024. It is not the case of the respondent that the liberty granted to the petitioner by way of parole was misused by him.

11. This Court also finds justification in the submission made by Mr. Sekhri that the delayed surrender was during the Covid time when emergency parole was granted to the convicts and the same was extended from time to time, therefore, the petitioner lost track of the extensions being granted and the date of surrender.

12. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed.

13. Consequently, it is directed that the petitioner 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 of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent, further subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall report to the SHO of the local area once a week on every Sunday between 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM during the period of furlough.

(ii) The petitioner shall furnish a telephone/mobile number to the Jail Superintendent as well as SHO of local police station, on which he can be contacted, if required. The said telephone number shall be kept active and operational at all the times by the Petitioner.

(iii) The Petitioner shall ordinarily reside at the address mentioned in the Petition.

(iv) Immediately upon the expiry of period of furlough, the petitioner shall surrender before the Jail Superintendent.

(v) The period of furlough shall be counted from the day when the petitioner is released from jail.

14. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

15. Copy o