Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67322

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, M. Jothiraman, JJ
Zubaitha Begum – Appellant
Versus
The State represented by its Home Secretary, Prison Department (IV) St. George Fort, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009 – Respondent
W.P.Nos.30216, 30212, 30505, 30514 of 2024 | W.P.No.31417, 31415 of 2023 | W.P.(Crl.) Nos.1113, 1114, 1115, 1116, 1117, 1119, 1121 of 2025 | W.P.M.P.(Crl.) Nos.530, 531, 532, 533, 583, 584 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M.Mohamed Saifulla, Mr.S.Manoharan
For the Respondents: Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.R.John Sathyan Senior Counsel

The High Court cannot grant interim bail after the sentencing part is complete; such powers lie exclusively with the Government under the Suspension of Sentence Rules.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982 - Applications for premature release of convict prisoners filed - Court ruled that it cannot direct the State to grant premature release of prisoners; it has no power to grant interim bail after sentencing - The concept of bail presupposes custody, which is not applicable post-sentencing for prisoners already serving terms - Government has the authority to suspend or remit sentences, not the court - References made to Supreme Court clarifications on similar issues. (Paras 1-44)

(B) Judicial Review of Executive Power - The court cannot compel the Government to grant premature release; entitled only to a consideration of the application as per law and policy. (Paras 23-31)

Facts of the case:
Various petitioners, relatives of convict prisoners, sought premature release via applications based on prior representations and sought interim bail while those representations were considered by the Government.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld limitations on its powers regarding premature release and bail, emphasizing the need for the appropriate Government to consider such applications.

Issues: Whether the court can grant interim bail when the sentencing part is over; the Government's discretion regarding remission and consideration of premature release petitions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded it lacks jurisdiction to intervene in matters of interim bail post-sentencing. Only the Government may exercise discretion to grant remission or consider applications for premature release.

Result: All petitions dismissed, with a directive for timely consideration of the representations by the Government.

Table of Content
1. introduction of petitioners and representations for early release (Para 1)
2. court's review of interim bail procedures (Para 2 , 6)
3. interim bail considerations and legal precedents (Para 3 , 4)
4. distinction between custody and release procedures (Para 5 , 11 , 12)
5. authority of courts vs. government in granting bail and remission (Para 10 , 13 , 18)
6. court's role in reviewing remission requests (Para 14 , 15 , 20)
7. limitations of judicial mandate in concerning early release (Para 21 , 22)
8. conclusions on petition for premature release and government authority (Para 27 , 43 , 44 , 45)

COMMON ORDER

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

W.P.Nos.30216, 30212, 30505, 30514 of 2024, 31417, 31415 of 2023 have been filed for a direction to the Government to release the convict prisoners prematurely, by considering the representation of the petitioners therein. The miscellaneous petitions in W.P.M.P.(Crl.) Nos.530, 531, 532, 533, 583 & 584 of 2025 and the writ petitions in W.P.(Crl.) Nos.1113, 1114, 1115, 1116, 1117, 1119, 1121 of 2025 have been filed to extend the interim bail/leave granted to the convict prisoners, pending consideration of the representation before the Government to release them prematurely.

2.The miscellaneous petitions for extension of interim bail/leave pending consideration of the representations before the Government to release the convict prisoners prematurely, have been filed on the basis of the interim bail granted by a Division Bench of this Court earlier inW.M.P.No.27482 of 2023 in W.P.No.16127 of 2020 [Munni v. State]by order dated 29.09.2023. The said writ petition in W.P.No.16127 of 2020 was challenging the order rejecting the request for premature release of convict prisoner therein. During the pendency of the said writ petition, a Division Bench of this Court granted interim bail based on two orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Based on such interim bail granted in the said writ petition, whenever a writ petition is filed to consider the representation of the petitioner seeking prematurely release, several miscellaneous petitions are also filed either for grant of interim bail for a specific period which are entertained by this Court, or for extension of interim bails so granted.

3.It is relevant to note that the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the earlier Division Bench of this Court to grant interim bail, are ones passed at the admission stage or immediately thereafter. One of the orders was made inS.L.P.(Crl.)No.12784 of 2022 [Sikkander v. The Stateand others], dated 25.07.2023, at the admission stage. It is relevant to note that, later, the Special Leave Petition in S.L.P.(Crl.)No.12784 of 2022 itself was also disposed of as infructuous, since the life convict was released pursuant to the order of remission passed by the Government. Similarly, the other order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was made inSardar Khan v.State and others [S.L.P.(Crl.) No.10176 of 2022, dated 12.09.2023],which was also passed at the admission stage. The said Special Leave Petition has been filed challenging the order of the Division Bench of this Court upholding the rejection of premature release. Therefore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted interim bail and the matter was adjourned to 20.02.2024.

4.Based on the above two interim orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court at the admission stage, the Division Bench of this Court, in W.M.P.No.27482 of 2023 in W.P.No.16127 of 2020 has granted interim bail, pursuant to which, several applications are being filed for interim bail and the same is also granted, and this Court has also extended the interim bail from time to time.

5.Now, the miscellaneous petitions and few writ petitions before us are also seeking similar extension of interim bail granted by this Court to the convict prisoners, pending consideration of the representation by the Government for premature release. When the matter came before us on 27.10.2025, we entertained a doubt as to grant

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67322

The High Court cannot grant interim bail after the sentencing part is complete; such powers lie exclusively with the Government under the Suspension of Sentence Rules.

Cases Referred (3)