A prisoner's entitlement to ordinary leave for rehabilitation should not be denied based solely on a vague apprehension of absconding by police authorities, especially when the prisoner's conduct has been found to be satisfactory and professional probation reports recommend the leave.

J U D G M E N T

The mother of Convict No.555/23 of Central Prison and Correctional Home, Thavannur, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the grant of ordinary leave/parole for a period of thirty days for the above prisoner. Earlier, she had filed W.P (Crl) No.59/2026 seeking the same relief, which was disposed of by this Court as per the judgment dated 17.02.2026 with a direction to the second respondent to take a decision on the application for ordinary leave submitted by the petitioner’s son within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of that judgment. Accordingly, the second respondent considered the above application of the prisoner and rejected the request stating the reason that the District Police Chief, Katihar, Bihar and the 4th respondent herein opposed the above prayer of the Convict. Aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the second respondent, the petitioner is here before this Court with this writ petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

It has been stated by the 3rd respondent in unequivocal terms in the statement of facts submitted before this Court that the behaviour of the aforesaid Convict in the prison was perfectly satisfactory and that no disciplinary action has been taken against him. Ext.P3 order passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prison, also contains indications in the above regard. It is also brought out that, but for the objections of the District Police Chief, Kattihar and the third respondent, the aforesaid Convict is entitled for regular leave. It is further stated in Ext.P3 that the District Probation Officer, Kattihar, had also recommended ordinary leave to the son of the petitioner. In the light of the above aspects made out of the case records, the District Police Chief, Kattihar and the District Probation Officer, Kattihar, are suo motu impleaded as additional respondents 8 and 9 in this writ petition.

As per the statement of facts and the observations in Ext.P3 order, District Police Chief, Kattihar had apprehended that the Convict might abscond if he is granted regular leave. However, the District Probation Officer, Kattihar had recommended regular leave to the above Convict. It is not revealed in Ext.P3 order or in the statement of facts of the 3rd respondent as to why the third respondent had opposed the grant of regular leave to the above Convict. At any rate, the denial of regular leave to the son of the petitioner upon the mere apprehension of the additional 8th respondent about the chances of the above Convict absconding, cannot be justified.

Since the son of the petitioner is stated to be entitled for regular leave, the respondents 2 to 4 are liable to extend the above benefit to the said Convict since the objective behind granting leave to a prisoner is for facilitating his rehabilitation and resocialisation as an incentive for good conduct and responsiveness to correctional treatment while undergoing imprisonment. Of course, appropriate conditions are to be imposed to safeguard that the above convict will not venture to abscond while on leave, as feared by the additional 8th respondent.

In the result, the writ petition stands allowed as follows:

The respondents 2 to 4 are hereby directed to grant eligible regular leave to Convict No.555/23 Bachan Rishi of Central Prison and Correctional Home, Thavanoor subject to the conditions enumerated hereunder, in addition to the usual conditions:

i) The aforesaid Convict shall report before the District Probation Officer, Kattihar (Additional 9th respondent) on every Saturdays during the period of leave availed by him.

ii) The District Probation Officer, Kattihar shall note the attendance of the said prisoner in compliance with the aforesaid direction and relieve him forthwith during such appearances.

iii) In case the aforesaid prisoner fails to appear before