Sandhya vs Deputy Inspector General of Prisons - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41754

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41754

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R.Swaminathan, V.Lakshminarayanan, JJ
Sandhya – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Inspector General of Prisons – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S.Nadhiya
For the Respondents: R.Muniyapparaj

Table of Content
1. overview of the petition for ordinary leave and the basis for its rejection. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court applies judicial precedent to authorize prisoner leave despite regulatory restrictions. (Para 4)

(Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J . )

Heard both sides.

2. The writ petitioner’s husband is a life convict. He has already undergone 20 years of incarceration in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. The petitioner submitted an application to the respondents seeking grant of 40 days ordinary leave. The said request was rejected vide order dated 07.05.2026 by citing Rule 35 of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982.

3. Our attention is drawn to the order dated 18.04.2024 in W.P.No.9081 of

2024 [S.Amaravathi Vs. The Secretary to Government and Others] in which even though the same Rule was cited, the Hon’ble Division Bench chose to grant the relief.

4. We are inclined to adopt the very same relief. In this view of the matter, the impugned order stands quashed and the convict-prisoner is granted forty (40) days ordinary leave without escort.

5. The writ petition is allowed on the following conditions:~

(a)The convict-prisoner, Sampath S/o.Panner Selvam, [C

Click Here to Read the rest of this document