Sharda Jain v. State Of NCT Of Delhi

$~78 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 3998/2025 SHARDA JAIN .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Abhinav Sekhri & Mr. Aru Vashisht, Advs.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:

Mr.

Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State with Ms.

Sakshi Jha, Adv.

SI Mukul Yadav, PSKeshav Puram

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 03.12.2025 1.

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.

2.

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.

3.

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 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

of one year prior to his application.

4.

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.

5.

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.

7.

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.

AMIT MAHAJAN, J DECEMBER 3, 2025 "SS"

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