Delhi HC rejects Vikas Yadav’s plea for furlough in Nitish Katara murder case

NEw new new delhi: The Delhi heights margaret court on midweek dismissed Nitish Katara murder case convict Vikas Yadav’s petition seeking three weeks’ furlough to maintain social ties.A bench of Justice Ravinder Dudeja held that the jail authorities’ decision to reject Yadav’s request for furlough did not suffer from arbitrariness, illegality, or any violation of constitutional rights.“In view of the above, this court finds no arbitrariness, illegality or violation of constitutional rights in the order dated October 29 or the corrigendum dated December 1, 2025. The petition is accordingly dismissed,” the court said while pronouncing the verdict.A detailed copy of the verdict is awaited.Yadav had moved the High Court against the jail authorities’ October 29, 2025, decision rejecting his request for release on furlough. The jail authorities justified their decision by citing the gravity of the offence, the severity of the sentence imposed, and the victim’s apprehension that the convict might flee the country, disrupt public order, or cause irreparable harm to the victim’s family.In his petition, argued by senior advocate Vikas Pahwa, Yadav contended that his furlough plea was rejected arbitrarily and without due consideration of the fact that he was previously granted interim bail by the Supreme Court for four and a half months on account of his mother’s medical treatment, followed by an extension on the ground of his marriage.The petition further stated that Yadav has been in continuous custody for 23 years without ever being granted furlough and now seeks release to spend time with his wife following his recent marriage. He also contended that he meets the eligibility criteria under Rule 1223 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, which permits furlough for prisoners demonstrating good conduct.Delhi Police, represented by special prosecutor Rajesh Mahajan along with advocate Jyoti Babbar, and Neelam Katara, represented by advocate Vrinda Bhandari, had earlier submitted before the bench that Yadav was not eligible for furlough under the Detailed Project Report (DPR), emphasising that furlough is not an absolute right of a prisoner and that there was ample material on record to justify his non-release.Mahajan argued that although the DPR requires a prisoner to have earned three annual good conduct remissions, Yadav could not be granted the same as his sentencing order mandates a 25-year term without remission.Nitish Katara’s mother, Neelam Katara, contended that the DPR also requires demonstrable good conduct and an unblemished record, which Yadav lacked. Katara, represented through advocate Vrinda Bhandari, alleged that his conduct included misuse of judicial processes and that his actions disqualified him from furlough, asserting that he showed no signs of reform.Bhandari further claimed that Yadav attempted to influence sitting judges, falsified documents, violated bail conditions, secured undue benefits, and filed false cases even while in custody. She also alleged that since the commission of the murder, he had repeatedly flouted the law, obstructed the trial, misled the judiciary, pressured witnesses and the public prosecutor, and, after conviction, made over 100 unauthorised hospital visits in connivance with prison and hospital authorities.Besides seeking furlough, Yadav had also filed a separate petition seeking release from jail.Katara was abducted from a marriage party on the intervening night of February 16 and 17, 2002, and then killed over his alleged relationship with Vikas’s sister, Bharti Yadav.The trial court in May 2008 found former Uttar Pradesh politician D.P. Yadav’s son Vikas Yadav, Vishal Yadav, and their aide, contract killer Sukhdev Pehelwan, guilty of kidnapping and burning Katara to death and awarded them life sentences. The High Court in February 2015, while upholding the life imprisonment awarded to Vikas and Vishal, specified a 30-year sentence without remission and awarded a 25-year jail term without remission to Sukhdev.The Supreme Court in July 2016 modified Vikas and Vishal’s sentence to 25 years without remission and Sukhdev’s sentence to a 20-year jail term without remission. On July 29, the Supreme Court directed Sukhdev’s forthwith release but dismissed Vikas’s petition against the condition requiring him to remain in jail for 25 years without remission, while granting him liberty to approach the Delhi High Court. The Supreme Court in August 2017 had rejected Yadav’s plea seeking review of the 2016 order.