Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ANITA SUMANTH, SUNDER MOHAN, JJ
Mrs.T.Blessita – Appellant
Versus
The Home Secretary, Home Department (Prison) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for convict's leave. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court’s assessment of natural justice. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. leave granted based on previous judgments. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. final decision on leave application. (Para 7) |
The wife of one Thiyagarajan @ Thiyagu (convict), presently confined in Central Prison – I, Puzhal, Chennai, has sought a certiorarified mandamus to quash order dated 18.02.2026 rejecting the request for 28 days ordinary leave for the convict.
2. The reason assigned in the impugned order is that there are several pending cases against him and the same reason is reiterated in the counter filed by respondents citing Rule 35 of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982.
3. We have heard Mr.Boris, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, assisted by Mr.M.Slvester John, for the respondents.
4. It is true that Rule 25 places a bar upon the grant of leave in cases of convicts as against whom cases are pending. It is also true that Rule 40 vests authority in the government to exempt any prisoner from all or any provisions of the Rules. In the present case, the respondents have not thought it fit to exercis
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
