Saleena v. The State Represented By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 17.12.2025 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN and W.P.M.P.(Crl).No.82 of 2025 --- Saleena, W/o A.M.Hakkim .. Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy-620 020.

.. Respondent Writ Petition (Criminal) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order bearing No.4469/Tha.Ku.4/2025, dated 09.06.2025 passed by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to grant emergency leave for 15 days without escort to the detenue A.M.Hakkim, S/o Abdul Majith, aged about 44 years, Convict No.22948, detained at Central Prison, Trichy.

1 / 4

For petitioner : Mr.S.Manoharan For respondent : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, Addl.P.P. assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John

ORDER

(The Order of the Court was made by P.Velmurugan, J) Challenging the order passed by the respondent, in and by which, the leave of the detenue was rejected, this Writ Petition is filed by the wife of the detenue--A.M.Hakkim, S/o Abdul Majith, now detained at Central Prison, Trichy.

2. In the representation sent to the respondent by the petitioner, she has stated that she is unable to do work and is suffering from some ailment and the detenue has to come and take care of her.

3. The impugned rejection order shows that the Probation Officer was entrusted with field verification and the reason assigned in the said representation was found to be false and therefore, the respondent rejected the representation made by the petitioner. Since the petitioner has applied for leave of the detenue on false information, 2 / 4

the leave sought for by the petitioner was rejected holding that the detenue is not entitled for leave. The impugned order is passed based on the report of the Probation Officer. This Court does not find any perversity in the impugned rejection order passed by the respondent.

4. Hence, the Writ Petition (Criminal) is dismissed. Consequently, the miscellaneous petition is closed. (P.V.,J) (M.J.R.,J) 17.12.2025 cs To

1. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy-620 020.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 3 / 4

P.VELMURUGAN, J and M.JOTHIRAMAN, J cs 17.12.2025 4 / 4