$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010212552026 + W.P.(CRL) 1537/2026 SANDEEP @ MANOJ .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Mr. Anmol Kumar Pandey and Ms. Jyoti Yadav, Advs. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC for the State. Insp. Prempal Singh, PS: Anand Vihar. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 17.08.2026 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that while placing reliance on Rule 1223 of the Delhi Prison Rules 2018, the case of one Anil Kumar in Anil Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) dated 05.12.2025 passed in W.P.(Crl) 1477/2025 was rejected by the respondent-State for grant of furlough which came to be interfered by this Court and the furlough was accepted. 2. Paragraphs 8 to 12 of the said decision are extracted as under: “8. As per Nominal Roll as on 21st May, 2025, the Petitioner has undergone 14 years 1 month and 24 days, excluding remission of 1 years 6 months and 7 days earned by him. The Petitioner has already completed rigorous imprisonment of 2 years in case FIR No. 189/2010, registered at P.S. P. Vihar, under Sections 356/379/411/34 IPC. He has, further, completed rigorous imprisonment of 3 years in case FIR No. 16/2011, registered at P.S. Pandav Nagar, under Sections This is a digitally signed order. 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 20/08/2026 at 11:37:26 392/411/414/34 IPC. 9. The Nominal Roll records that his conduct in the last year has been satisfactory. Although his overall conduct is stated to be unsatisfactory due to past punishments, the last punishment imposed upon him was in 2022. Moreover, the Petitioner has earlier been released on parole twice by this Court without any instance of misconduct during those periods. 10. This Court is conscious that furlough serves not merely as a privilege but as a structured rehabilitative measure within the correctional framework. Long-term incarceration without any temporary release can lead to social disconnection and negatively impact the mental well-being of the convict. Allowing limited release enables a prisoner to reconnect with family, attend to personal responsibilities, and maintain a sense of purpose and stability, all of which contribute to successful reintegration and reduce recidivism. Temporary release also affords prisoners a respite from the pressures of prolonged confinement and supports their psychological and emotional health. 11. The Petitioner has not received any punishment since 2022, has already served the sentences imposed in the other two matters relied upon to classify him as a habitual offender, and has previously not demonstrated any misconduct during his periods of parole. Keeping these factors in view, this Court is of the opinion that the Petitioner deserves to be granted furlough for a period of three weeks. 12. Accordingly, order No. F.10(003474280)/CJ/LEGAL/PHQ/2025/M1836 dated 27th February, 2025, is hereby quashed. The Respondent is directed to release the Petitioner on first spell of furlough for a period of 21 days, to re-establish the social ties with family members, on furnishing of a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent/Trial Court/Duty Metropolitan Magistrate, and further subject to the following conditions: (i) The Petitioner shall not leave the NCT of Delhi during the period of furlough, without the prior permission of this Court; (ii) The Petitioner shall provide the mobile number(s) to the concerned Jail Superintendent and SHO at the time of his release, which mobile number shall be kept in a working condition at all times; (iii) The Petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO Delhi, on every Monday between 11:00 AM and 11:30 AM to mark his presence. However, he shall not be kept waiting for longer than one hour for this purpose; (iv) The Petitioner shall positively surrender before the concerned Jail Superintendent on the expiry of the period of furlough.” 3. In view of the aforesaid, the subsequent development will have to be considered by the concerned Authority in accordance with observations made by this Court in the case of Anil Kumar. This is a digitally signed order. 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 20/08/2026 at 11:37:26 4. Depending upon the overall facts and circumstances, the decision will have to be taken. Accordingly, the impugned decision is set aside. 5. Let a fresh decision be taken within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order passed today. 6. All rights and contentions are left open. 7. If the grievance of the petitioner is not mitigated, he shall be at liberty to file a fresh petition. 8. A copy of this order be sent to the Jail Authorities. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J AUGUST 17, 2026/P This is a digitally signed order. 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 20/08/2026 at 11:37:26