$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 19.02.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 27.02.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 28.02.2026 + W.P. (CRL) 2980/2025 AMAR PAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shiv Chopra, (DHCLSC), Mr. Shravan Pandey, Ms. Surbhi Arora and Ms. Shivani Kaushik, Advocates versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State with Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mr Kshitiz Garg and Mr Anshul Sharma, Advocates CORAM:

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

JUDGMENT

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction, order for quashing the rejection order no. F.10(3800430)/CJ/LEGAL/ PHQ/2025/4376, dated 05.08.2025, passed by the Director General (Prisons) and further seeks grant of furlough for a period of three weeks.

2. The facts, as apparent from the records, are that the petitioner herein is presently confined in Central Jail No. 2, Tihar, New Delhi, in connection with a case arising out of FIR No. 560/2008, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter „IPC‟]. He was acquitted by the learned Trial Court, and upon appeal being filed, the petitioner herein was convicted by this Court vide judgment dated 09.12.2019 passed in CRL.A. 1309/2013 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for 12 months. The conviction and sentence of the petitioner was thereafter upheld by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court.

3. The nominal roll of the petitioner has been received. Upon perusal of the same, it is noted that the petitioner has remained in judicial custody for about 7 years 3 months.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has, as on date, undergone actual custody of more than seven years out of the total sentence of ten years awarded to him. It is argued that the object of furlough is reformative in nature, intended to preserve family ties and facilitate social reintegration. It is stated that the petitioner was earlier released on parole and, save for one instance where he surrendered with a short delay owing to the demise of his brother Late Prakash and the performance of last rites and cremation ceremonies, he has not misused the liberty granted to him. It is submitted that such delay was neither deliberate nor motivated by any criminal intent. The punishment tickets dated 03.05.2024 and 02.12.2024 have not been approved by the learned Jail Visiting Judge. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the present petition be allowed.

5. On the other hand, the learned ASC for the State submits that the applicant has jumped parole on multiple occasions and has been re-arrested twice. It is further stated that the petitioner was awarded punishments dated 11.03.2022, 05.05.2024 and 02.12.2024 on account of absconding during parole and was subsequently re- arrested in connection with a fresh offence allegedly committed by him. It is contended that although the conduct of the petitioner during the last one year is stated to be satisfactory, the same cannot efface his past conduct, and that the overall jail conduct of the petitioner is reported to be unsatisfactory in view of the multiple punishments awarded to him. Such conduct, according to the learned ASC, clearly demonstrates a repeated and deliberate breach of the trust reposed in him by the prison authorities, but he has consistently misused the liberty granted to him. In these circumstances, the possibility of the petitioner absconding again, if released on furlough, cannot be ruled out. It is thus prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

6. This Court has heard arguments addressed on behalf of the petitioner as well as the State, and has gone through the material p