PAWAN SINGH vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

$~68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 15.04.2025 + W.P.(CRL) 4072/2024 PAWAN SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for State with SI Anuradha, PS Harsh Vihar CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) CRL.M.A. 11266/2025 (exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.A. 11265/2025 (for early hearing) 2. Keeping in mind that for past 2-3 dates the matter could not reach for hearing till end of the day before the predecessor bench, the application is allowed with consent of both sides and hearing dated 22.05.2025 is preponed to this day. W.P.(CRL) 4072/2024 3. The petitioner has assailed order dated 30.10.2024 of the competent W.P.(CRL) 4072/2024 Page 1 of 3 pages Digitally signed by GIRISH GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.04.15 18:26:40 -07'00' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:15.04.2025 18:57:29 authority, whereby his application for grant of second spell of furlough for two weeks was dismissed. The reason for denial of furlough, as recorded in the impugned order was that the petitioner on the previous occasion overstayed on furlough and surrendered belatedly, for which punishment of warning was recorded against him. According to the impugned order, the petitioner would be now entitled to seek furlough after 11.09.2025. 4. It is contended on behalf of petitioner that in view of order dated 07.06.2019 passed by the Additional Inspector General of Prisons, Tihar, the punishment of warning is not a substantive punishment, so cannot be treated as a reason to deny furlough. 5. Apart from the above mentioned order, copy whereof has been placed on record at pdf 21, it also would