Chithra v. The Deputy Inspector General Of Prison,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.01.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA and WMP Crl.(MD) No.397 of 2025 Chithra Presently detained at Special Prison for Women Madurai District.
... Petitioner -vs1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Prison and Correctional Services Madurai Range, Madurai Central Prison Campus, New Jail Road, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Prison, Office of the Superintenent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District.
3.Mallika, Jailor Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District.
... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein to take appropriate action against the third respondent Jailor Mallika and her associates for custodial torture to the petitioner by considering the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2025. For Petitioner :
Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For Respondents :
Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.] The prayer in the petition is to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein to take appropriate action against the third respondent Jailor Mallika and her associates for custodial torture to the petitioner by considering the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2025.
2. The petitioner is a under trial prisoner and she was detained under Act. 14 of 1982. The petitioner is now detained in Special Prison for Women, Madurai. While being so, she lodged complaint before the respondents 1 and 2 alleging that she was subjected to harassment and threat on her life by the third respondent. Further she was also faced threat by other inmates in the prison. On receipt of the
said complaint the second respondent conducted enquiry, however no action was taken against the third respondent, hence the petitioner has come forward with the present petition.
3. A perusal of the counter filed by the second respondent reveals that on 22.08.2025 while the inmates were proceeding to School and library the third respondent visited the block where the petitioner was housed and instructed other inmates from a different block , who had not yet departed to proceed to school. The petitioner informed the Chief Head Warden that she was refused to attend school and entered into arguments with her, during which she was abused. The petitioner lodged a false complaint alleging that fellow inmates had assaulted her at the instigation of the third respondent. Further as per prison regulation the radio and television broadcasts are permitted only between 7.00 pm., to 10.00 pm., following evening lockup and no such broadcast are allowed beyond stipulated period. Further during the rounds by the II grade warden in the night hours she found the petitioner lying down casually conversing and laughing with two other inmates. When questioned by the warden regarding why they have not
yet slept, the inmates responded that they were unable to sleep. The warden advised them to take rest, following which they reportedly went to sleep without further incident.
4. While being so, the petitioner made false allegations against her own inmates also the third respondent herein, therefore this Court directed the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Madurai to enquire into the complaint lodged by the petitioner dated 02.09.2025. Further after completion of enquiry the District Legal Services Authority, Madurai submitted a report dated 21.01.2026. As directed by this Court, the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Madurai conducted enquiry with the inmates by name Selvarani, Sankara Myla, Saranya, Megala and Rani. One of the inmate Selvarani deposed that on the date of occurrence the petitioner was attempted to strangulate by pressing her leg. However the third respondent did not take any action. The other inmates did not see anything as stated by the petitioner herein. In fact the petitioner alleged that one of the inmate Nattathi Latha attempted to strangulate her by pressing her leg. Though it was noticed by the third respondent no action was taken against her.
5. Thereafter on enquiry it was found that the third respondent did not force or coerced any other prisoners to engage in sexual harassment. That apart now the third respondent was transferred to Central Prison, Vellore , therefore the allegation levelled against the third respondent in the representation dated 02.09.2025 during enquiry found that no such allegations is against the third respondent and as such the direction sought for by the petitioner cannot be considered. Further along with report the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Madurai also submitted a medical record and it reveals that the petitioner did not sustain any injuries
6. In view of the same, the Writ Petition (Crl.) stands dismissed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
[G.K.I., J.] [R.P., J.] 27.01.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes / No aav
To:
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Prison and Correctional Services Madurai Range, Madurai Central Prison Campus, New Jail Road, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Prison, Office of the Superintenent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN , J.
and R.POORNIMA , J.
aav 27.01.2026