Selvi v. The State, Represented By Its Secretary,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 25.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Selvi ... Petitioner .Vs.

1.The State, represented by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 09.

2. The Additional Director General of Prison, O/o The Additional Director General of Prison, No.1, Gandhi Erwin Road, Egmore, Chennai - 08.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Jail, Madurai.

4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Manamadurai, Sivagangai.

5.The Inspector of Police, Thirupachetti Police Station Sivagangai.

....Respondents Prayer:-Writ Petition Criminal is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to grant parole/emergency leave on 10.10.2025 to the petitioner's brothers 1/4

namely Michael Muniyandi alias Muniyandisamy S/o.Pandi and Ilayaraja S/o. Pandi confined at Central Prison Madurai, as puberty function of Michael Muniyandi's daughter is scheduled on 10.10.2025. For petitioner : Mr.M.Dinesh Hari Sudarson For Respondents : Mr.B.Mambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This petition is filed for issuance of writ of Mandamus to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.09.2025.

2. However, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the representation was subsequently considered by the respondents and an order of rejection was passed on 18.09.2025 itself. Therefore, the relief sought for by the petitioner has become infructuous.

3. Heard both sides and perused the records.

4.The petitioner made representations on 13.09.2025 and 16.09.2025 and the said representations were considered by the respondent and an order of rejection was passed on 18.09.2025. Therefore, the writ of mandamus does not survive and the prayer sought for by the petitioner has become infructuous. In view of the same, this 2/4

writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, the petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedy in the manner known to law, if at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of rejection passed by the respondent. (P.V.,J.) (L.V.G.J.,) 25.09.2025 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No CM To 1.The State, represented by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 09.

2. The Additional Director General of Prison, O/o The Additional Director General of Prison, No.1, Gandhi Erwin Road, Egmore, Chennai - 08.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Jail, Madurai.

4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Manamadurai, Sivagangai.

5.The Inspector of Police, Thirupachetti Police Station Sivagangai.

3/4

P.VELMURUGAN,J.

and L. VICTORIA GOWRI ,J.

CM 25.09.2025 4/4