Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41833
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L. Victoria Gowri, N. Senthilkumar, JJ
S. Vijaya – Appellant
Versus
Inspector General of Prisons – Respondent
WP Crl. No. 1168 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: B. Periyanana
For the Respondents: S. Raja Kumar
The High Court may direct authorities to expeditiously consider and decide upon a pending representation regarding the medical treatment of a prisoner under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Headnote:The proceedings arise from a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a Writ of Mandamus to facilitate the transfer of a prisoner to a medical facility for treatment. The petitioner alleged that a formal representation dated 04.05.2026 for medical care had not been adequately addressed by the prison authorities. The Court observed that the grievance required immediate administrative attention. The core issue was whether the prison authorities were obligated to consider the petitioner's request for medical transfer. The ratio decidendi emphasizes the Court's role in ensuring state authorities perform their due diligence on administrative representations concerning the health rights of inmates. The Court avoided adjudicating on the illness directly, opting instead to direct the authorities to process the pending representation. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.05.2026 and pass appropriate orders within two weeks.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. mandating administrative consideration of prisoner medical transfer requests. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
For Petitioner: Mr.B.Periyanana For Respondents: Mr.S.Raja Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER (Made by L.Victoria Gowri J.)
Seeking a direction to the respondents to transfer the petitioner’s son, Sakthivel, son of Shanmugaraj, aged 30 years, presently confined in Central Prison, Salem to any Government or Private Hospital to give appropriate medical treatment, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made a representation on 04.05.2026 but the same has not been considered.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner’s representation would be considered.
4. In view of the above, the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 04.05.2026 and pass appropriate orders within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
