IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

and

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

W.P.Crl.No.1370 of 2025

and

W.P.M.P.Crl.No.659 of 2025

Alamelu ... Petitioner

W/o.Vijayakanth

Vs.

1. The Home Secretary, Home Department (Prison), Secretariat, Fort St.George,

Chennai – 600 009.

2. The Inspector General of Prisons,

Prison Head Quarters,

Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

3. The Superintendent of Prison,

Central Prison I,

Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of

India, praying to issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings in CP-PU1/3164/2025-R2 dated 10.10.2025 by the 3^rd respondent and quash the same and consequently

direct the 3^rd respondent to grant 28 days’ ordinary leave without escort to the petitioner’s brother Srinivasan, S/o.Sampath, (Convict No.10886/PID No.495108), presently confined at Central Prison-I, Chennai.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Basil For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, Additional Public Prosecutor, assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN, J.,]

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings dated 10.10.2025, rejecting the representation of the petitioner’s brother Srinivasan S/o.Sampath (Convict No.10886 / PID No.495108), presently confined at Central Prison-I, Chennai, seeking ordinary leave for a period of 28 days.

2. The petitioner is the sister of the convict prisoner, Srinivasan S/o.Sampath. The said Srinivasan was convicted on 10.09.2024 by the Principal Special Court under the EC & NDPS Act Cases, Chennai, for the offences under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act [hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act’] and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of twelve years, together with the benefit of set off under Section

428 Cr.P.C.

3. According to the petitioner, her brother Srinivasan has already undergone more than two years and six months of incarceration of actual imprisonment, and his conduct in prison has been satisfactory, without any adverse remarks. While so, he submitted a representation dated 17.09.2025 seeking grant of 28 days’ ordinary leave, primarily on the grounds that his elder sister is suffering from an eye ailment, requiring urgent surgery and that the presence of the convict prisoner is necessary to attend to the emergent family circumstances and to make necessary arrangements. However, his request was rejected vide impugned proceedings dated 10.10.2025, bearing No.CP-PU1/3164/2025-R2, solely on the ground that the convict prisoner was convicted for the offences under the NDPS Act and therefore, he is not eligible for ordinary leave as per Rule 21(h)(3) of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982 hereinafter referred to as ‘TNSOS Rules’]. This rejection order is assailed in the present writ petition, besides seeking a direction to the third respondent to grant 28 days’ ordinary leave without escort to the convict prisoner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s brother, the convict prisoner, has already undergo more than two years and six months of incarceration and that in similar cases, the Division of Bench of this Court has considered and granted ordinary leave to convict prisoners convicted under the NDPS Act. He further submitted that although the constitutional validity of Section 32-A of the NDPS Act has been upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dadu Alias Tulsidas Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2000) 8 Supreme Court Cases 437, the same does not curtail the powers of the competent authorities to grant parole or the powers of the Court to suspend the sentence pending appeal. Therefore, the denial of the benefit sought by the convict prisoner is arbitrary, based on a total misunderstanding of legal position, and unsustainable