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) 13203

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
REMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(CRL.) NO. 314 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH, SHRI.VISHNU CHANDRAN, SHRI. RALPH RETI JOHN, SHRI.GIRIDHAR KRISHNA KUMAR, SMT.GEETHU T.A., SMT.MARY GREESHMA, SMT.LIZ JOHNY, SMT.KRISHNAPRIYA SREEKUMAR, SHRI.ABHIJITH P.S, SMT.DEVIKA MANOJ, SHRI.ASHUTHOSH P. KAMATH
For the Respondents: GP- E.C. BINEESH

Conditions restricting a convict's movements must be legally sustainable, particularly when affecting familial access.

Headnote:This Writ Petition under Article 226 seeks Mandamus to lift the restriction on a convict's entry into police station limits. The petitioner contends the imposed condition hinders the convict's family access. The court finds the restriction unsustainable under previous judgment references. The petition is allowed, quashing restrictions from entering the designated area.

Table of Content
1. review of conditions placed on convicts regarding familial access. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court finds current restrictions unsustainable based on prior judgment. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The prayers in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are as follows:-

i. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 2nd respondent to lift the condition whereby the prisoner is restricted from entering into Ottapalam Police Station limits.

ii. To grant any such other and further relief as this Hon’ble court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case to meet the ends of justice.

iii. To dispense with the production of English Translation of vernacular documents in the writ petition.

2. The petitioner is the mother of a convict. The petitioner’s son by name Vinod, S/o. Radhakrishnan (Convict No.208/2023) is undergoing imprisonment in S.C. No. 698/2019 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Court, Ottapalam, Palakkad, at the Central Prison and Correctional Home, Thavanoor. The convict has been granted ordinary leave as per Ext. P2 order. The grievance of the petitioner is that, while granting ordinary leave, the convict has been restrained from entering the territorial limits of Ottapalam Police Station, where his family house is situated. The grievance of the petitioner is that, in view of the condition imposed in Ext. P2 order, the convict is unable to enjoy the fruits of the ordinary leave. It is submitted that this restriction curtails his right to go to his family house, where his aged parents are residing. The learned counsel relied on Ext. P6 judgment in W.P. (Crl.) No. 1390 of 2025 dated 22.10.2025, to contend that the condition imposed in Ext. P2 is not legally sustainable.

3. Having regard to the circumstances brought out, I feel that the condition in Ext. P2 to the effect that the convict shall not enter the territorial limits of Ottapalam Police Station is unsustainable.

4. The writ petition is allowed as follows:

The condition in Ext. P2 to the effect that the petitioner’s son/convict shall not enter the jurisdictional limits of Ottapalam Police Station, is quashed. The petitioner’s son/convict is free to enter the jurisdictional limits of Ottapalam Police Station.

Sd/-

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