Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 34916
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH, K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ
M.Pandiyaraj – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise (Prison-IV) Department, Fort. St.George, Chennai - 600 009. – Respondent
W.P.Crl.(MD).No.2200 of 2026
For Petitioner: Mr.C.Karthikeyan
For Respondents: Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor
Court modified prison leave escort condition to daily reporting and family sureties for life convict.
Headnote:Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenged the condition in prison proceedings No.292/VuTha.2/2026 dated 23.03.2026, which granted 28 days ordinary leave to a life convict but required escort accompaniment. Essential facts involved a representation for leave by the convict's brother, serving sentence at Central Prison, Madurai. The court found the escort condition modifiable based on case circumstances. The main issue was the legality of the imposed escort condition for ordinary leave. The court's reasoning emphasized balancing prison administration with practical leave conditions, modifying the escort requirement to daily reporting and sureties by family members, while retaining other original conditions. The writ petition was allowed, modifying the leave condition to daily reporting at 6.00 p.m. to the police inspector and submission of two family sureties; other conditions unchanged.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to escort condition in granted prison leave. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. hearing of counsel arguments. (Para 2) |
| 3. modification of leave conditions proposed. (Para 4) |
| 4. writ petition allowed with directions. (Para 5) |
This petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the
3rd respondent made in No.292/VuTha.2/2026, dated 23.03.2026, wherein the 3rd respondent granted 28 days ordinary leave and imposed the condition that the convict shall be accompanied by an escort.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
3. The petitioner's brother was convicted to undergo life imprisonment and he is presently serving the sentence at Central Prison, Madurai. A representation was made seeking ordinary leave. The 3rd respondent, through the impugned proceedings dated 23.03.2026 granted ordinary leave imposing condition that the convict shall be accompanied by an escort. This condition has been put to challenge in the present Writ Petition.
4. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made on either side, this Court is inclined to modify the condition imposed by the 3rd respondent to the effect that the convict shall report before the 5th respondent daily at 6.00 p.m. during the entire period of ordinary leave. Apart from this condition, the detenue is permitted to submit sureties before the 4th respondent and two of the sureties shall be family members of the detenue. The other conditions imposed by the 3rd respondent shall remain as they are.
5. This Writ Petition (Criminal) is allowed with the above directions. No costs.
