VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Shanmugavalli v. The Director General of Prison,

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
30 April 2026
Bench
N. Anand Venkatesh, K.K. Ramakrishnan
Case no.
WP Crl.(MD) 2046/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow N. Anand VenkateshFollow K.K. Ramakrishnan

Judgment

O R D E R [Order of the Court was made by N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.] This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the second respondent made in No.254/Uo.tha.2/2026 dated

23.03.2026 and for a direction to the respondents to grant ordinary leave to the petitioner's husband, who is serving sentence at Central Prison, Madurai.

¶2The petitioner is the wife of the life convict, who is serving sentence for 4 years and 25 days. A representation was made by the petitioner seeking ordinary leave and the same came to be rejected by the second respondent through the impugned proceedings dated 23.03.2026 on the ground that there is a pending case against the convict. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition was filed before this Court.

¶3When the matter came up for hearing on 24.04.2026, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a fresh representation dated 10.04.2026 has been sent to the respondents. In the light of the said submission, we directed the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to take instructions and listed the matter for hearing today. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the said representation also came to be rejected through the proceedings dated 25.04.2026 by the second respondent. A copy of the proceedings was also placed before this Court.

¶4On carefully going through the proceedings dated 25.04.2026, it is seen that the representation has been rejected only on the ground that there is one pending case against the convict for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, and 506(ii) of IPC.

¶5Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case and considering the reason for which, the ordinary leave has been sought for by the petitioner, we are inclined to interfere with the impugned proceedings of the second respondent dated 23.03.2026 and 25.04.2026 and the same are hereby set aside. There shall be a direction to the second respondent to grant 21 days ordinary leave to the convict with the condition that he will report before the fifth respondent daily at 6.00 p.m. during the entire ordinary leave period.

¶6This Writ Petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs.

[N.A.V., J.] & [K.K.R.K., J.]

30.04.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Indu To

1.The Director General of Prison, Directorate of the Central Prison, Tamilnadu Prison, Veanals Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Madurai Range, Madurai Central Prison Campus, Madurai City 625 016.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai City 625 016.

4.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City.

5.The Inspector of Police, Keerathurai Police Station, Madurai City.

6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. N.ANANDoVENKATESH,oJ. AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,oJ. Indu W.P.Crl.(MD).No.2046oofo2026

30.04.2026

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN W.P.Crl.(MD).No.2046 of 2026 Shanmugavalli ...... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director General of Prison, Directorate of the Central Prison, Tamilnadu Prison, Veanals Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Madurai Range, Madurai Central Prison Campus, Madurai City 625 016. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai City 625 016. 4.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City. 5.The Inspector of Police, Keerathurai Police Station, Madurai City. ...... Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent vide his proceedings in No.254/Uo.tha.2/2026 dated 23.03.2026 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to grant ordinary leave to the petitioner's husband Vijayalingam, S/o. Chinna Pandi, aged about 55 years, a convict prisoner in PID No.410049 confined at the Central Prison, Madurai, forthwith without escort. For Petitioner : Mr.J.Vijayaraja For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.