Delhi High Court - Orders
Vijay Kumar vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 31 October, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 2103/2025
VIJAY KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Appearance not given.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC (Crl.) with Mr.
Kshitiz Garg, Mr. Manan Wadhwa,
Mr. Anshul Sharma, Ms. Komal
Chauhan, Mr. Nitish Dhawan and Mr.
Kshitiz Garg, Advocates for State.
SI Mukul Yadav, P.S. Keshav Puram.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 31.10.2025
1. The Petitioner vide the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231 (Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732) seeks quashing of the Jail Punishment ticket dated 8th October, 2024.
2. The Petitioner was convicted in case FIR No. 56/2002, registered at P.S. Keshav Puram, Delhi, under Sections 302/380/34 IPC, vide judgement dated 30th March, 2010 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of INR 8,000/-, and in default, to 1 "BNSS"
2"CrPC"
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 03/11/2025 at 23:07:44 undergo simple imprisonment for a period of nine months. As on date, the Petitioner has undergone a period of over 20 years in custody.
3. As per the said Jail Punishment Ticket, the Petitioner was released from jail on 15th May, 2021, on emergency parole for a period of 90 days. The parole was extended from time to time due to the Covid-19 pandemic situation, and the Petitioner was finally required to surrender on 7 th April, 2023. However, he failed to surrender and was rearrested only on 1 st August, 2024. Consequently, the said punishment ticket was issued, warning the Petitioner to remain careful in future.
4. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was unaware of the date fixed for his surrender, due to which he inadvertently overstayed his parole. It is contended that the failure to surrender was neither deliberate nor intentional. The Petitioner had attempted to contact the Jail Administration but did not receive any intimation regarding the date of surrender. Counsel further submits that the Petitioner has previously been granted parole and furlough on multiple occasions, and on all such occasions, he has duly surrendered on time and has no record of any misconduct. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned punishment is unjustified and causes grave prejudice to the Petitioner.
5. Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC (Crl.), opposes the present petition and submits that since the Petitioner surrendered late, he was only issued a warning to be careful in future, and hence, there is no infirmity in the impugned ticket.
6. Heard. The Nominal Roll of the Petitioner received from the concerned Jail Superintendent indicates that the Petitioner has been granted parole and furlough on at least 20 occasions since 2012, and there is no record of any misconduct or failure to surrender, except for the present 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 03/11/2025 at 23:07:44 instance arising from the emergency parole granted on 15th May, 2021 during the Covid-19 pandemic, which was extended periodically. It must be borne in mind that the Covid-19 pandemic was a period of unprecedented uncertainty, during which the terms and extensions of emergency paroles were frequently modified, and there was considerable confusion regarding the exact dates of surrender. In such a situation, a lapse in compliance cannot automatically be treated as wilful or deliberate.
7. It appears probable that the Petitioner was genuinely unaware of the final date of surrender, given the multiple extensions of emergency parole and the lack of clear communication from the authorities. Thus, Petitioner's failure to surrender was an inadvertent omission, rather than a deliberate attempt to evade custody. Accordingly, considering the Petitioner's otherwise satisfactory record, and the extraordinary circumstances prevailing during the pandemic, the benefit of doubt ought to be extended to him. It must also be noted that imposition of punishment, even in the nature of a warning, must be quashed in the facts of the present case as it has the potential of effecting Petitioner's right to seek pre-mature release.
8. In view thereof, the present petition is allowed and the Jail Punishment ticket dated 13th September, 2021 is hereby quashed.
9. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
SANJEEV NARULA, J OCTOBER 31, 2025 as 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 03/11/2025 at 23:07:44