Life convict ineligible for ordinary leave without completing three years; conjugal rights not enforceable as right.

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the first respondent made in No.282/Muoo/2026, dated 25.03.2026 and for a direction to the first respondent to grant 21 days ordinary leave without escort to the petitioner's husband, who is a life convict, presently serving sentence at Central Prison, Salem.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. The petitioner had sought ordinary leave for her husband; however, the same has been rejected by the first respondent on the ground that the petitioner's husband is yet to complete three years of sentence in order to qualify for the grant of ordinary leave. This reason assigned by the first respondent while passing the impugned order is perfectly legal and does not require the interference of this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the conjugal rights of the detenue are being denied by invoking the relevant Rule in Tamil Nadu Prison Manual .

5. This Court, inMeharaj Vs. State of Tamil Nadureported in 2022 (1) CTC 609,has categorically held that such conjugal rights can never be claimed as a matter of right by a convict and this law governs the field as on today.

6. In view of the above, there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the first respondent. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.