Kerala High Court
Mujeeb Rahman vs State Of Kerala on 4 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 11833 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
MUJEEB RAHMAN,
THEKKINAKKADAN HOUSE,
EDAVANNA P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN 676 541
BY ADVS. SHINOJ.K.NARAYANAN
C.K.RAPHEEQUE
K.B.NIDHINKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, KERALA
PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES DEPARTEMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRVANDRUM
PIN 695 001
2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRIOSONS AND CORRECTIONAL
SERVICES, PRISONS HEAD QUARTERS,
POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN 695 012
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT,
CENTRAL PRISON, KANNUR,
PIN 670 004.
BY SMT MAYA M N (PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(c).No.11833 of 2021 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 4th day of June, 2021
According to the petitioner, he had sought for parole and was
granted by this Court till 08.04.2021. While being in parole, he
was diagnosed as Covid positive on 09.04.2021 and turned
negative on 21.04.2021. On further investigation on 30.04.2021,
the petitioner was again tested positive. According to the medical
practitioner, who has treated the petitioner, the situation is a rare
one and impacted due to high viral load. He being a diabetic
patient was advised hospitalisation. The Jail authorities demanded
the petitioner to surrender after the reverse quarantine. The
petitioner thereafter moved for extension of period of parole for 30
more days. The prayer for extension was rejected by this Court
vide order passed on 09.04.2021 in W.P(C) No.7163 of 2021. The
petitioner appealed against the order but lateron withdrew from it
and accordingly, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. In the
order passed on 09.04.2021, the learned Single Bench has also
directed the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for
getting the period of his over stay regularised.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that representation
filed as Ext.P4 before the 2nd respondent as early as on 04.05.2021,
was not acted upon and a fruitful result has not yet come in his
favour.
3. Accordingly, in the Writ Petition on hand, a direction to
the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation at the earliest
and to pass appropriate orders is sought.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor though sought for time
for getting instructions, in the factual context stated as above, this
Court finds that instructions are not necessary. The only relief
sought for is a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4
representation already filed by the petitioner for getting the over
stay regularised.
Therefore, the Writ Petition stands allowed to the extent of
issuing a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4
representation and to pass appropriate orders, within three weeks
from this day, in accordance with the law applicable to the context.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH
JJ JUDGE
APPENDIX OF W.P(C) NO.11833 OF 2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT PI TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2021 IN
W.P(C) 7163 OF 2021
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE OF
THE PETITIONER DATED 30.04.2021
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.04.2021
IN W.P(C) 7163 OF 2021
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
04.05.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
//TRUE COPY//
