Dismissed

S.Karpagam v. the Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu

Madras HC30 Jul 2019HCP/48/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking premature release of her husband, a life convict. The Court observed that the release request had been rejected. The petition was closed, liberty being granted to the convict to challenge the rejection order.

What did the court decide?

The Habeas Corpus Petition stood closed with liberty given to the life convict to challenge the order rejecting the request for premature release.

S.Karpagam Vs the Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 30.07.2019

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

H.C.P. No.48 of 2019

¶6

S.Karpagam ... Petitioner -vsThe State Rep. By its 1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Home, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009 2.The Additional Director General of Prison, C.M.D.A. Towers, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem. ... Respondents

¶7

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to release the detenu , M.Saravanan, S/o. Munusamy, life convict prisoner, prematurely, confined at Central Prison, Salem, as per the G.O.(Ms).No.64, dated 01.02.2018.

¶8

For Petitioner : Dr.S.Manoharan For Respondents Mr.C.Iyyappa Raj : Addl. Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶9

[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.]

¶10

Seeking a direction to the respondents to release the detenu, M.Saravanan, S/o. Munusamy, life convict prisoner, prematurely, confined at Central Prison, Salem, as per the G.O.

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

(Ms).No.64, dated 01.02.2018, the present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the wife of the detenu.

¶13

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents submitted that the request of premature release has been rejected by passing an order. If that is the case, the life convict will have to challenge the aforesaid order.

¶14

In view of the above, the Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed by giving liberty to the life convict to challenge the aforesaid order of rejection passed.

¶15

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mmi/ssm
To
1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Department of Home,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009
2.The Additional Director General of Prison,
C.M.D.A. Towers,
Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
3.The Superintendent,
Central Prison,
Salem.
4.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.

¶16

H.C.P. No. 48 of 2019

¶17

PPA(CO) GMY(18/09/2019)

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Karpagam v. the Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Karpagam v. the Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Ganesh Vs the Commissioner of Polic,E

Jothi Vs the Commissioner of Police

Kaliyammal Vs the Secretary to Government

K.Prema Devi Vs the State Rep by Its

Dr.Wills Shiela Vs D.Soumya Swaminathan

Shanmugam Selvaraj, Vs the Inspector of Police