Disposed

Pazhaniammal v. The State represented by its

Madras HC28 Feb 2024WP(MD)/2225/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench issued ordinary leave without escort to the detenu, rejecting the initial refusal after noting the pending criminal case had resulted in acquittal, directing the prison authorities to consider fresh leave applications within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Detenu Soundarajan granted ordinary leave for 30 days without escort; Prison authorities directed to consider fresh applications within four weeks.

Pazhaniammal Vs The State represented by its — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED:28.02.2024

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶5

W.P.(MD) No.2225 of 2024 and

¶6

W.M.P(MD)No.2230 of 2024

¶7

Pazhaniammal

¶8

... Petitioner/Mother of the detenu

¶9

-vs-

¶10

1.The State, represented by its

¶11

1.The Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Home, Fort St.George, Chennai -600 009.

¶12

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Trichy Range, Trichy Central Prison, Trichy – 620 020.

¶13

3.The Superintendent, Trichy Central Prison, Trichy- 620 020.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the

¶16

1/5

¶17

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

¶18

records pertaining to the impugned order bearing No. 106.Mu.Vu./2023, dated 12.12.2023 passed by the second respondent and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to grant ordinary leave for 30 days without escort to the detenu Soundarajan, son of Subramani, aged about 35 years, Convict No. 22527, confined at Central Prison, Trichy.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Manoharan

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.S.Ravi, Addl.Public Prosecutor

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. AND C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

¶23

This Writ Petition is filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order bearing No.106.Mu.Vu./2023, dated 12.12.2023 passed by the second respondent and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to grant ordinary leave for 30 days without escort to the detenu Soundarajan, son of Subramani, aged about 35 years, Convict No.22527, confined at Central Prison, Trichy.

¶24

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

¶25

2/5

¶26

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and

¶27

perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶28

3.The request for ordinary leave is denied on the ground that there is another case pending against the convict in S.C.No.79 of 2015, on the file of Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Coimbatore for the offence under Section 307 of IPC. However, after filing of the Writ Petition, it is now brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents that the said criminal case, ended in acquittal. Therefore, the ground for not considering the grant of oridinary leave is no more.

¶29

4.In the light of the above facts, this Court is of the view that it is suffice to dispose of the Writ Petition, with a direction to the Petitioner to make a fresh application to the Prison authorities for ordinary leave. If such application is made, the prison authorities shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of request/application from the Petitioner.

¶30

3/5

¶31

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

¶32

5.With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶33

[G.J.,J.] [C.K.,J.]

¶34

28.02.2024

¶35

NCS : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No vsn

¶36

To:

¶37

1.The Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Home, Fort St.George, Chennai -600 009.

¶38

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Trichy Range, Trichy Central Prison, Trichy – 620 020.

¶39

3.The Superintendent, Trichy Central Prison, Trichy- 620 020.

¶40

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶41

4/5

¶42

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

¶43

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. AND C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

¶44

vsn

¶45

ORDER MADE IN

¶46

W.P.(MD) No.2225 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD)No.2230 of 2024

¶47

28.02.2024

¶48

5/5

¶49

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

Pazhaniammal v. The State represented by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pazhaniammal v. The State represented by its

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

E.Stalin Vs The State represented by its

Selvarani Vs The Deputy Inspector General of Prison

K.Mangaleswari Vs The Superintendent of Police

Indirani S Vs The Superintendent of Police

Al Ummaira Vs The Superintendent of Police

Malathi Vs The Deputy Inspector General of Police