Disposed

K.Jayanthi v. the State Rep. by Its

Madras HC16 Feb 2024WP/3588/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus-related writ petition, the wife of a detenue sought premature release under specific government orders. The single-judge court directed the respondents to consider the pending representation regarding premature release within eight weeks and disposed of the matter without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider the representation seeking premature release and pass orders on merits within eight weeks.

K.Jayanthi Vs the State Rep. by Its — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.3588 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 16.02.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶8

W.P.No.3588 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.3866 of 2024

K.Jayanthi

... Petitioner

Vs.

The State represented by its, 1.The Secretary to the Government of TN, Home (Prison-IV) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶13

2.The Superintendent of Prison, Trichy Prison, Trichy-620 620.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to release the detenue Karunakaran, S/o.Swaminathan, aged about 67 years, bearing Convict No.98913, now confined at Central Prison Trichy, prematurely as per the letter, No.001/tha.Ku.1/2024, dated 03.01.2024 by the respondent and on the basis of the G.O.(Ms).No.488, dated 15.11.2021.

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

Page 1 of 5

¶18

W.P.No.3588 of 2024

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Manoharan For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak, Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.Aravind.C

¶20

ORDER

¶21

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J. )

¶22

The petitioner herein is the wife of the detenue Karunakaran,

¶23

S/o.Swaminathan, aged about 67 years, bearing Convict No.98913, confined at Central Prison Trichy, has come forward with this writ petition seeking premature release.

¶24

2.The petitioner states that her husband was convicted for the offences under Section 323 r/w 149, 147, 436 r/w Section 149, 302 r/w 149 and 323 IPC (2 counts) on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Protection of Civil Rights), Thanjavur and sentenced to undergo one year of rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 147 IPC, ten years of rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 436 r/w 149 IPC, six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 323 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 r/w 149 IPC and to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

Page 2 of 5

¶27

W.P.No.3588 of 2024

¶28

323 r/w 149 IPC. The petitioner's case is that her husband is eligible for premature release as per G.O.(Ms).No.488, Home (Prison-IV) Department, dated 15.11.2021, since he has been in incarceration for the past 14 years in Central Prison, Trichy. Therefore, she made a representation dated 30.12.2023 to the respondents seeking premature release. Since the same has not been considered till date, he has come forward with this writ petition.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶30

Having regard to the limited scope of the prayer in the writ petition, this Court, without going into the merits of the petitioner's representation or the contentions of the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, directs the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2023, seeking premature release and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of (8) eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

Page 3 of 5

¶33

W.P.No.3588 of 2024

¶34

5.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No

¶35

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶36

Post the matter on 15.04.2024 for recording compliance.

¶37

[M.S.R., J] [S.M., J]

¶38

16.02.2024

¶39

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶40

Anu

¶41

¶42

1.The Secretary to the Government of TN, Home (Prison-IV) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶43

2.The Superintendent of Prison, Trichy Prison, Trichy-620 620.

¶44

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

Page 4 of 5

¶47

W.P.No.3588 of 2024

¶48

M.S.RAMESH, J. and SUNDER MOHAN, J.

¶49

Anu

¶50

W.P.No.3588 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.3866 of 2024

¶51

16.02.2024

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

Page 5 of 5

K.Jayanthi v. the State Rep. by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Jayanthi v. the State Rep. by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Vasuki Vs State Represented by

Babu @ Syed Babu @ Battery Babu Vs The Inspector of Police

V.Ramakrishnan Vs the Superintendent of Police

Vanniya Raja Vs the State Represented by Its

J.Natarajan Vs State Rep.by

A.Abdul Siddiq @ Abt Siddiq Vs The State Rep by its