AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 361 wordsN.Anand Venkatesh, J
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the second respondent made in No.1221/utha.2/2025 dated 16.04.2026 and for a direction to the respondents to grant forty days ordinary leave without police escort to the convict, who is the husband of the petitioner herein, undergoing sentence at Central Prison, Madurai.
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
The petitioner's husband is a life convict, who is undergoing sentence at Central Prison, Madurai. The petitioner submitted a representation before the respondents seeking for ordinary leave on the ground that the convict's father is suffering from serious ailments and he requires the physical and moral support of the convict. Apart from that, the convict must also arrange for funds for the education of his daughter.
The second respondent rejected the representation mainly on the ground that there are two pending cases against the convict through the proceedings dated 16.04.2026. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
A counter-affidavit has been filed by the third respondent. The third respondent has taken a stand that there are two pending cases against the convict and hence, the representation made by the petitioner seeking for ordinary leave was rejected.
This Court carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record.
The convict has undergone sentence for seven years and one month and had already been granted emergency leave on six occasions. Nothing untoward had taken place, when the emergency leave was granted to the convict. This Court also takes into consideration the reasons for which the ordinary leave has been sought for.
In the light of the above, the impugned proceedings of the second respondent made in No.1221/utha.2/2025 dated 16.04.2026 is hereby quashed. There shall be a direction to the second respondent to grant 28 days ordinary leave to the convict subject to the condition that the convict will report before the Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station, Madurai District, daily at 05.00 p.m., during the entire period of ordinary leave.
This Writ Petition (Criminal) is allowed in the above terms.