VIKAS @ VICKY @ PONGA vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 14.07.2025 + W.P.(CRL) 4048/2024 VIKAS @ VICKY @ PONGA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Yadav and Mr. Anmol Kumar, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for State. CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1. Petitioner has assailed order dated 05.12.2024 of the Competent Authority, whereby his request for furlough was rejected. The petitioner has also sought to be released on first spell of furlough for a period of three weeks in case FIR No.384/2009 of PS Sultanpuri for offences under Section 302/394/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act. Status report, opposing the petition was filed on behalf of respondent. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned ASC for respondent. 2. By way of the impugned order dated 05.12.2024, the Competent Authority rejected the request of the petitioner to be released on furlough largely on the ground that on emergency parole he was released on W.P.(CRL) 4048/2024 Page 1 of 3 pages Signature Not Verified GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally Signed KATHPALIA Date: 2025.07.14 17:33:56 +05'30' By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:14.07.2025 17:48:15 16.04.2021 (apparently the period of covid pandemic) and the release was extended from time to time till 06.04.2023; however, on 09.10.2021, the petitioner got involved in another case which was for offence under Section 21 NDPS Act. Thus, according to the impugned order the petitioner violated conditions of emergency parole. Further, the Competent Authority took a view that the overall conduct of petitioner was found to be unsatisfactory, so he is not entitled to furlough. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that the impugned order is not sustainabl