SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9443

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
SARASWATHY SIVASWAMY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(CRL.) NO. 1729 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.K.DEEPA
For the Respondents: ADV N R SANGEETHA RAJ PP

The court highlights the need for timely consideration of premature release applications for convicts who have served substantial sentences.

Headnote:In this Writ Petition (Criminal) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of Mandamus for the premature release of her son, a convict serving a life sentence. The court directed the Jail Advisory Committee to expeditiously consider this release, within three months of presenting this judgment. The issues include the lack of a police report delaying the committee's decision and the importance of timely consideration of convicts' release applications.

Table of Content
1. the petitioner seeks a writ for her son's premature release. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the court discusses delays in considering the release. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The prayers in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of Indiaare as follows:-

i.To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction, directing the respondents to release the petitioner's son Sri. Jayakumar (Convict No.221) who has been undergoing sentence of life imprisonment for 22 years, 10 months and 23 days (including remission earned) as on 17.11.2025 in Open Prison & Correctional Home Cheemeni, Kasaragod.

ii.To dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents.

iii.To grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The petitioner is the mother of convict No.221 lodged in the Open Prison & Correctional Home, Cheemeni, Kasaragod. The greivance of the petitioner is that her son's premature release was not considered in the Jail Advisory Board.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submits that the authorities are awaiting report from the Superintendent of Police, Coimbatore. The case of the convict was considered on 11.09.2025, but it was deferred because the Superintendent of Police did not submit the report. It is submitted that the Jail Advisory Committee will consider the matter at the earliest.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Jail Advisory Committee to consider the premature release of the petitioner, as expeditously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

K.BABU JUDGE

kkj

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top