$~43
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%					       Date of Decision: 08th January, 2026
+ 	W.P.(CRL) 55/2026
	KARAN MANDAL					 .....Petitioner
Through:	Mr. Sidharth Yadav with Mr. Anmol Panday, Mr. Vikas Deep, Ms. Jyoti Yadav, Advocates. 
				versus
	STATE (NCT OF DELHI)			    .....Respondent
				Through:	Mr. Sanjay Lao, SC for State. 

	CORAM:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
				J U D G M E N T (oral)

1. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 06.10.2025 whereby his request of furlough has been declined. 
2. The reason of rejection is very categoric. 
3. Since on one earlier occasion, the convict had been released on furlough with effect from 31.10.2015 to 15.11.2015 and since he jumped furlough and did not surrender on due date and was re-arrested on 28.07.2022 only, the benevolent provision of furlough has been denied to him in terms of Rule 1224(iii) of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 which stipulates that any such person who has been re-arrested, while released on parole or furlough, would not be entitled for furlough. 
4. Learned counsel for petitioner, however, submits that after his re-arrest on 28.07.2022, the petitioner has never availed furlough or parole. 
5. He also submits that in terms of Rule 1223 Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, he has become eligible, again, since he has maintained good conduct in the prison and has earned rewards in last three annual good conduct reports and continues to maintain good conduct. He also submits that petitioner is not a habitual offender and, therefore, despite the fact that he had earlier jumped the furlough, his case deserves to be considered in terms of Rule 1223 of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018. 
6. In this regard, he strongly relies upon order dated 09.05.2022 passed in Satender Alias Gajender vs. State (Govt. Of NCT of Delhi): W.P(C) No.(CRL) 221/2022.   
7. In view of the above, while setting aside the rejection order, the Competent Authority is directed to reconsider the request for grant of furlough in view of the Rule 1223 of Delhi Prison Rule, 2018 and also in light of the specific directions contained in Satender Alias Gajender (supra), without being influenced by the fact that the petitioner had, on earlier occasion, jumped furlough. 
8. Let such request be considered as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four weeks. 
9. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 
10. A copy of this Order be immediately sent to Jail Superintendent for information and necessary compliance.


(MANOJ JAIN)                                                                                 JUDGE
	JANUARY 8, 2026/sw/pb


W.P.(CRL) 55/2026							1