Madras High Court
Mahalakshmi vs The Additional Director General ... on 24 February, 2021
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:24.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
Mahalakshmi :Petitioner
.vs.
1.The Additional Director General of Police (Prisons)
Gandhi Irwin Road,
Egmore, Chennai.
2.The Superintendent of Central Prison,
Central Prison,
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli District. : Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd
respondent dated 04.01.2021 and set aside the same and to grant ten days
ordinary leave/parole to the petitioner's son namely Manikandan (C.P.No.
3628), son of Innasi Muthu, who is confined at Central Prison,
Palayamkottai to enable him to execute a sale deed.
1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
For Petitioner :Mr.C.K.M.Appaji
For Respondents :Mr.R.Anandharaj
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
*********
[Order of the Court was made by K.KALYANASUNDARAM.,J.]
This writ petition has been filed by the mother of the convict to
quash the order of the second respondent, dated 04.01.2021, wherein,
leave sought for by the petitioner for a period of 10 days was rejected.
2. The petitioner would claim that her son Manikandan was
convicted by the Mahila Court, Thoothukudi in S.C.No.18 of 2014 for
the offences punishable under Sections 302, 397, 201 r/w 511 of IPC
vide judgment, dated 22.10.2014 and various sentences were imposed
including Life Imprisonment. Crl.A(MD)No.124 of 2016 filed by him
before this Court challenging the conviction and sentence was dismissed
on 16.11.2016 and he is now confined at Central Prison, Palayamkottai.
3. The petitioner would state that her husband purchased a
property in Survey No.451/16 to an extent of 4 cents in Karuppur
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
Village, Ettaiyapuram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, subsequently, he died
on 15.06.2016. Thereafter, she suffered financially and now, she has
decided to sell the property to settle debts, for which, the presence of her
son is required. Therefore, she sent a representation to the second
respondent on 21.12.2020 requesting parole for a period of 10 days, but,
it was rejected by the impugned order of the second respondent.
4. Mr. C.K.M.Appaji, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would argue that since the petitioner sought for parole for a period of 10
days, it was rejected by the second respondent on the ground the relevant
rule does not permit and for execution of the sale deed, the presence of
convict is required only for two working days and therefore, the
petitioner is ready to give a fresh representation to the second
respondent. It would suffice, if a direction is given to the second
respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner.
5. Mr.R.Anandaraj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondents would urge that the convict involved in the
offence punishable under Section 397 IPC and hence, he is not entitled
for ordinary leave and parole can be considered under the emergency
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
leave and hence there is no illegality in the impugned order and if a fresh
representation is given by the petitioner, the second respondent is ready
to consider the same in accordance with law.
6. Though the petitioner had sought for a larger relief, however,
considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this
writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to give a fresh
representation to the second respondent by enclosing the copy of this
order, within a period of two weeks and on receipt of such representation,
the second respondent shall consider the same and pass orders on merits
and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks there from.
7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
[M.K.K.S.,J.] & [G.I.,J.]
24.02.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
am
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
Note :
In view of the present lock
down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the
order may be utilized for
official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of the
order that is presented is the
correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the
advocate / litigant concerned.
To
1.The Additional Director General of Police (Prisons)
Gandhi Irwin Road,
Egmore, Chennai.
2.The Superintendent of Central Prison,
Central Prison,
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
AND
G.ILANGOVAN,J.
am
0RDER MADE IN
W.P(MD)No.3552 of 2021
24.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
