Annaperumayi v. The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Madurai Range, Madurai.2.The Superintendent of Prison
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 302
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.[A.D.J.C., J.] [R.P., J.] 27.06.2025 Index: Yes / NoNeutral Citation: Yes / NormNote : Issue order copy on 27.06.2025Page No.5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.336 of 2025To:1.The Deputy Inspector…
Judgment
W.P(MD)No.336 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 27.06.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRAandTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMAW.P.Crl. (MD)No.336 of 2025andW.M.P(MD)No.91 of 2025 Annaperumayi... PetitionerVs.
The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Madurai Range, Madurai.
The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison, Madurai.
The Superintendent of Police Madurai District.... RespondentsPRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to Page No.1 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.336 of 2025issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records in pursuant to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent by his proceedings in No.670/UTha.2/2025 dated 26.06.2025 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents herein to grant ordinary leave for 21 days to petitioner's husband namely, Jeyakodi S/o.Mokkaraj a life convict prisoner (C.P.No.5361).For Petitioner: Mr.A.K.Azagar SamiFor Respondents: Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public ProsecutorO R D E R[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.]The writ petition has been filed challenging the order of rejection of representation seeking ordinary leave for her husband for the purpose of attending his house function (Vasantha Vizha).2. The case of the petitioner is that she had sought for ordinary leave for her husband to attend vasantha vizha. She had made a representation dated 10.06.2025 seeking 21 days of ordinary leave to her Page No.2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.336 of 2025husband. The 2nd respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 26.06.2025 by rejecting the petitioner's representation. Challenging the same, she has filed this writ petition.3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on instructions from the respondents would submit that the petitioner's husband has been convicted on 09.10.2013 in S.C.No.131 of 2012 for the offence under Section 302 IPC and since the Rules does not provide for grant of ordinary leave for attending Vasantha vizha function, the respondents have rejected the request of the petitioner.
In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's son-in-law and grand child died in an accident and after that they are arranging the first function in their house and the petitioner's husband being the only male member in the family, her husband's presence is very much required for the function.
Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. Page No.3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.336 of 20256. Though the Rules did not provide for grant of ordinary leave for attending vasantha vizha function, taking into consideration that the petitioner's son-in-law and grand child has passed away three months back and being an only male member in the family, his presence is needful one on that day, we are inclined to grant ordinary leave to the convict prisoner for one day with two escorts, on the following conditions: (i) The convict prisoner namely, Jeyakodi S/o.Mokkaraj (C.P No.5361) now detained in the Central Prison, Madurai, is granted ordinary leave for one day on 29.06.2025. (ii) The convict prisoner shall be released from the prison at 7.00 a.m on 29.06.2025 and he shall be brought back to the prison by 6.00 p.m on 29.06.2025.(iii) During the leave period, the convict prisoner shall abide by all the conditions prescribed in the Jail Manual. (iv) Two escorts shall be provided to accompany the convict prisoner. (v)The escort charges shall be borne by the petitioner and if necessary, the same shall be adjusted from the income earned by the convict prisoner during the imprisonment period. Page No.4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.336 of 2025(vi) The petitioner shall produce all necessary documents, along with a copy of this order, before the jail authorities.
It is abundantly made clear that this order has been passed, taking into consideration of extraordinary circumstances of this peculiar case and it shall not be treated as a precedent for any cases.
Operative part
With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.[A.D.J.C., J.] [R.P., J.] 27.06.2025 Index: Yes / NoNeutral Citation: Yes / NormNote : Issue order copy on 27.06.2025Page No.5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.336 of 2025To:1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Madurai Range, Madurai. 2. The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison, Madurai. 3. The Superintendent of Police Madurai District. 4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Page No.6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.336 of 2025A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.ANDR.POORNIMA, J.rmORDER MADE INW.P.Crl. (MD)No.336 of 2025DATED : 27.06.2025Page No.7 of 7
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.