Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9852 (MAD)

B.JEYASEELI v. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GNERAL OF PRISON,

WP/1204/2025 · 2025-01-28

M Jothiraman, S M Subramaniam

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.No.1204 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.01.2025 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P.No.1204 of 2025 B.Jeyaseeli .. Petitioner v. 1. The Deputy Inspector General of Prison Chennai Range, Prison Headquarters Whennels Road Egmore, Chennai 600 008 2. The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison-I Puzhal, Chennai 600 066 .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records No.530294/Tha.Ku.2/2024 dated 23.12.2024 passed by respondent No.2 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant 40 days ordinary leave to the petitioner's husband Babu, S/o Swamy, aged 64 years, Convict Prisoner No.6555 (PID 33243), now confined in the Central Prison-I, Puzhal, Chennai-66. For Petitioner :: Mr.K.Sakthivel for Mr.P.Pugalenthi ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.1204 of 2025 For Respondents :: Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.) W.M.P.No.1445 of 2025 seeking to dispense with production of the original impugned order, stands ordered. 2. The rejection of leave application in proceeding dated 23.12.2024 is under challenge in the present writ proceedings. The Superintendent of Prison rejected the leave application mainly on the ground that the prisoner absconded on expiry of leave on earlier occasion. Twice he failed to return back to jail after availing the leave in 1997 and 2004. However, he was admitted in the prison on 23.11.2000 & 08.09.2014 respectively. 3. This Court is of the considered opinion that for the past about ten years, the prisoner's conduct inside the prison is found to be satisfactory. The Probation Officer conducted an enquiry and made a finding that the reason stated in the leave application is correct. He recommended the case ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.1204 of 2025 of the prisoner for grant of ordinary leave. Taking note of the report of the Probation Officer, this Court is inclined to consider the present writ petition and pass the following order:- (i) The impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 23.12.2024 is set aside. (ii)The prisoner, namely, Babu, S/o Swamy, Convict No.6555 (PID No.33243), is granted 21 days ordinary leave without escort. (iii)The leave shall commence from 01.02.2025 10.30 A.M., and the prisoner shall surrender before the second respondent by 5.30 P.M., on 21.02.2025. (iv)The prisoner shall appear before the N-3, Muthialpet Police Station, Chennai daily at 11.00 A.M. during the period of leave. The writ petition stands allowed on the above terms. No costs. Index : yes/no (S.M.S.,J.) (M.J.R.,J.) Neutral citation : yes/no 28.01.2025 ss To 1. The Deputy Inspector General of Prison Chennai Range, Prison Headquarters Whennels Road Egmore, Chennai 600 008 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.1204 of 2025 2. The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison-I Puzhal, Chennai 600 066 3. The Inspector of Police N-3, Muthialpet Police Station Chennai 4. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.1204 of 2025 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J. AND M.JOTHIRAMAN,J. ss W.P.No.1204 of 2025 28.01.2025 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis