Back
P. N. PRAKASH, A. A. NAKKIRAN
Kalaivani – Appellant
Versus
State represented by its Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Home (Prison-IV) Department, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the third respondent in No.6380/R1/2021 dated 15.12.2021 and quash the same and direct the second and third respondents to grant one month leave without escort to the petitioner’s husband T. Suresh, male aged 34 years, S/o Thirunavukkarasu (Convict No.6380), who is confined in the third respondent prison, in accordance with law.)
P.N. Prakash, J.
1. Seeking 30 days ordinary leave under Rule 20 of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982 (for brevity “the Sentence Suspension Rules”) for the convict prisoner, viz., Suresh (Ct. No.6380), the petitioner, Kalaivani, who is his wife, addressed a representation dated 19.08.2021 to the respondents, which has been rejected by the Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison -I, Puzhal, Chennai, by order dated 15.12.2021, aggrieved by which, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. The Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison -I, Puzhal, Chennai, has filed a counter affidavit dated 28.02.2022 justifying the impugned order.
3. Mr. Senthilvel, learned couns
The central legal point established in the judgment is that Rule 35 of the Sentence Suspension Rules prohibits granting leave to a prisoner with a pending criminal case, and Rule 40 does not grant th....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that a convict prisoner facing trial cannot be granted leave, and the grant of remission or parole is a privilege available to the prisoner on f....
No mandamus under Article 226 to grant ordinary leave to ineligible convicts under Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982, as ordinary leave suspends sentence via subordinate legislation; cann....
Prisoners may receive ordinary or emergency leave during an appeal under the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, provided they are not facing concurrent trials, with the Rules aimed at assisting....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's constitutional power to relax rules, such as Rule 21(b) of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982, in suitable cases.
The court concluded that the pendency of an appeal cannot serve as a basis for denying a prisoner's application for leave, clarifying the scope of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
