The court emphasized discretion in granting emergency leave under Article 226 despite strict adherence to the rules regarding familial relationships.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner's brother is a life convict undergoing imprisonment at the Central Prison & Correctional Home, Kannur.

2. The convict submitted an application for emergency leave before the respondent No.2 as per Ext.P2, to attend the post-death rituals in connection with the demise of his cousin (father's brother's son). However, it was rejected as per Ext.P3 order, stating that father's brother's son would not fall within Rule 400 of the Kerala Prisons & Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014 (for short, 'the Rules'). It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

3. I have heard Sri.Nandagopal S. Kurup, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Sangeetha Raj N.R., the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. It is true that father's brother's son would not fall within Rule 400 of the Rules. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the last 14 years and 7 months, the convict has not availed even a single emergency leave and as such, Ext.P2 application has to be given a special consideration. Hence, I called for a report from the Jail Superintendent, Kannur, who reported that emergency leave has not been granted to the convict till date.

5. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the convict can be granted four days' emergency leave to attend the post-death rituals of his cousin, invoking the powers vested with this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India . Accordingly, the respondent No.2 is directed to grant four days' emergency leave to the convict from 13.11.2025 to

16.11.2025, as per rules.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.