Ramu v. The Deputy Inspector General Of Prison,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.04.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1815 of 2026 and W.M.P.(MD).No.443 of 2026 Ramu ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, O/o the Deputy Inspector General of Prison and Correctional Services Department, New Jail Road, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Theni District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Kadamalaigundu Police Station, Theni District.
..... Respondents Prayer :Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the order
passed by the first respondent in No.29/Ootha.2/2026 dated 19.01.2026 and quash the same and consequently directing the first and second respondents to grant 21 days ordinary leave without escort to the petitioner's father, namely, Chinna Vellai, s/o. Chinnathevar (PID No.454987) now confined under Central Prison, Madurai.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srikanth For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.) This petition has been filed challenging the proceedings passed by the first respondent in No.29/Utha.2/2026 dated 19.01.2026 and for a consequential direction to the first and second respondents to grant 21 days ordinary leave without escort to the petitioner's father, who is now confined at Central Prison, Madurai.
2. Heard the learned counsel on either side.
3. The petitioner's father was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. The conviction was further confirmed by this Court in Crl.A.No.886 of 1985. The petitioner made a representation seeking for 21 days ordinary leave to his father on the ground that the detenu has to undergo angiogram as per the medical advice. That apart, the presence of the detenu was required to attend the medical needs of his wife.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents on instructions submitted that earlier, the detenu was granted leave and thereafter, he went absconding for nearly 25 years and thereafter, he was secured and the detenu has undergone sentence only for a period of seven years till now. Therefore, he vehemently opposed for grant of leave to the detenu.
5. In our considered view, the detenu had misused the liberty that was granted by absconding for more than 25 years. Under such circumstances, considering the conduct of the detenu, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the first respondent.
6.This writ petition (Criminal) stands dismissed accordingly. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [N.A.V.,J.] [K.K.R.K.,J.] 02.04.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No TSG To 1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, O/o the Deputy Inspector General of Prison and Correctional Services Department, New Jail Road, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Theni District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Kadamalaigundu Police Station, Theni District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.
AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.
TSG W.P.CRL.(MD)No.1815 of 2026 02.04.2026