M.Sujitha v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.01.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY M. Sujitha ... Petitioner -vs1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison O/o. The Deputy Inspector General of Prison and Correctional Services Madurai Range, Madurai Central Prison Campus, New Jail Road, Madurai.

2.The Superintendent of Police Central Jail Madurai.

3.The Superintendent of Police O/o. The Superintendent of Police Madurai District 4.The Inspector of Police Therkuvasal Police Station, Madurai District ....Respondents.

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, directing the respondents to call for the records passed by the first respondent in No.622/Vu.tha.2/2025 dated 11.11.2025 and quash the same as bad in law and further direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant 30 ordinary leave without escort to the petitioner's husband namely Muniyasamy @ Chendu Muniyasamy, C.P.No.6120 who is languishing in Madurai Central Prison.

For Petitioner :

Dr.Lakshmi Prasanna Komara For Respondents :

Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

The prayer in the Writ Petition is to quash the impugned order passed by the first respondent in 622/Vu.tha.2/2025 dated 11.11.2025 and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant 30 ordinary leave without escort to the petitioner's husband namely Muniyasamy @ Chendu Muniyasamy, C.P.No.6120 who is languishing in Madurai Central Prison.

2. The petitioner is the wife of the convict prisoner. Her husband was convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.

3. The petitioner being wife of the convict has applied for ordinary leave for her husband to renovate the house which is in dilapidated condition, however the said request was rejected by an order dated 11.11.2025 on the ground that the husband of the petitioner is facing trial in S.C. Nos. 517 of 2023 and 391 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai.

4. When the person is facing trial in other cases he is not entitled for ordinary leave as per Rule 35 of Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner wants to renovate the house which is in dilapidated condition.

6. The house cannot be renovated within 30 days. That Apart Rule 35 of Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982 does not permit to grant any ordinary leave to the convict who is facing trial in another case, thereby the husband of the petitioner is not entitled for any leave.

7. In view of the same, this Court does not find any infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the first respondent, hence the petition stands dismissed. However the petitioner is at liberty to submit a fresh representation seeking emergeny leave on valid grounds.

[G.K.I., J.] [K.R.., J.] 02.01.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav To:

1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison O/o. The Deputy Inspector General of Prison and Correctional Services Madurai Range, Madurai Central Prison Campus, New Jail Road, Madurai.

2.The Superintendent of Police Central Jail, Madurai.

3.The Superintendent of Police O/o. The Superintendent of Police Madurai District 4.The Inspector of Police Therkuvasal Police Station, Madurai District

5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,Madurai.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN , J.

AND KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

aav 02.01.2026