Sugan v. The Chief Secretary Cum Home Secretary,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22-01-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN Sugan S/o.Periyasamy No.P2/62,Tsunami Quarters Periyakalapet, Puducherry Petitioner Vs
1. The Chief Secretary cum Home Secretary Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
2. The Directorate General of Police Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
3. The Inspector General of Prisons Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
4. Superintendent of Police for Prisons Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
5. Superintendent of Police Special Task Force Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
6. Inspector of Police Muthialpet/Villianur P.S, Puducherry
7. Inspector of Police Kalapet P.S, Puducherry Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to conduct a detailed enquiry on the complaint, dated 22-04-2024 within a time frame as this Hon'ble Court stipulates.
For Petitioner:
Mr.P.Muthukumrasaamy For Respondents:
Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) assisted by Mr.A.Alexander
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by P.Velmurugan J.) This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a mandamus to the Chief Secretary cum Home Secretary to Government of Puducherry, the first respondent herein to conduct a detailed enquiry on the complaint dated 22.04.2024 sent by the wife of the petitioner.
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) brought to the notice of this Court the counter affidavit filed by the sixth respondent Police, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of the directions issued by the learned Chief Judge, Puducherry based on the complaint made by the petitioner's wife regarding the alleged police excesses committed inside the prison, an enquiry was conducted and a detailed report was submitted before the Court on 27.08.2024, with regard to the search conducted by the Superintendent of Police (ARS) on the directions of the Senior Superintendent of Police (L&O), Puducherry in the Central Prison, Kalapet on
17.04.2024, where the petitioner-inmate was lodged, based on intelligence inputs received through higher authorities that certain prisoners were using mobile phones to contact and intimidate individuals outside the prison premises. Since action has already been taken on receipt of complaint, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the prayer sought for in the writ petition has become infructuous.
3. Per contra, the learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the petitioner was not at all aware of the enquiry conducted, as he was not served with the copy of the enquiry report. The learned counsel also submitted that since the procedure contemplated under Rule 30 of the Puducherry Prison Rules, 2021 has not been followed, the enquiry report cannot be sustained.
4. We have perused the materials produced by the learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) appearing on behalf of the respondents, which would show that pursuant to the directions issued by the learned Chief Judge, Puducherry in Letter No.515/JD/A/2024 based on the complaint lodged by the petitioner's wife on 22.04.2024, a detailed enquiry was conducted with the prison inmates and the report of enquiry was also filed on 27.08.2024. Though the learned counsel for petitioner would submit that his client was not aware of the enquiry, the enquiry report dated 27.08.2024 produced by the respondents before this Court would clearly show that statements were recorded not only
from the petitioner but also from the other inmates on the complaint regarding the alleged excesses committed by the police personnel inside the prison. When the present writ petition confines only for issuance of a mandamus to conduct an enquiry based on the complaint lodged by the petitioner's wife on 22.04.2024 and that the enquiry was already conducted and the enquiry report had been filed as early as on 27.08.2024, the relief sought for by the petitioner has now become infructuous. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, the petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy in the manner known to law, if so aggrieved by the enquiry report filed by the respondents. Consequently, W.M.P.No.19983 of 2025 is also dismissed. No costs.
(P.VELMURUGAN J.) (M.JOTHIRAMAN J.) 22-01-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes ss
To
1. The Chief Secretary cum Home Secretary Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
2. The Directorate General of Police Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
3. The Inspector General of Prisons Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
4. Superintendent of Police for Prisons Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
5. Superintendent of Police Special Task Force Government of Puducherry, Puducherry
6. Inspector of Police Muthialpet/Villianur P.S, Puducherry
7. Inspector of Police Kalapet P.S, Puducherry
8. The Public Prosecutor Puducherry at Madras High Court
P.VELMURUGAN J.
AND M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
ss 22-01-2026