Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1914 (MAD)

Saraswathi v. The Additional Director General of Police (Prison)

2015-04-16

R.MAHADEVAN

body2015
Judgment 1. The petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to grant parole to the husband of the petitioner, namely, Saminathan, son of Veeramani (Life Convict Prisoner No.13786) who is presently confined at Central Prison, Tiruchirapalli for a period of two weeks from 08.04.2015 to 22.04.2015 to look after his Mother who is seriously ill and also to arrange the funds for the treatment of his mother on the basis of the Petitioner's representation dated 01.04.2015. 2. Mr. M. Murugan, learned Government Advocate, was put on notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's husband, namely, Saminathan, is a life convict, lodged in Central Prison, Tiruchirapalli, whose mother is seriously ill and her condition is stated to be critical. Therefore, he moved a representation to the respondents on 01.04.2015 setting out the entire facts and circumstances and the same is pending consideration of the respondents. Pending consideration, he has preferred this writ petition for the relief stated earlier. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the petitioner's mother is at the evenings of her life and in view of the emergent circumstances involved in this case, the request of the petitioner may be considered by this Court. 5. The learned Government Advocate would only submit that reasonable restrictions may be imposed on the petitioner in case this Court considers to grant parole to the petitioner's husband. 6. The grant of parole by giving ordinary and emergency leave is governed by the Tamil Nadu Suspension and Sentence Rules, 1982. Rule 5 deals with two kinds of leave viz., emergency leave and ordinary leave. Rule 6 provides that emergency leave may be granted for attending death or serious illness of father, mother, wife, husband, son, daughter, full brother or full sister or the wedding of son, daughter, full brother or full sister of the convict. Rule 5 deals with two kinds of leave viz., emergency leave and ordinary leave. Rule 6 provides that emergency leave may be granted for attending death or serious illness of father, mother, wife, husband, son, daughter, full brother or full sister or the wedding of son, daughter, full brother or full sister of the convict. In view of the fact that in an earlier occasion, this Court has considered the issue involved in this Writ petition and also in view of the exigency of situation, namely, the mother of the accused is stated to be critical, the petitioner's husband, namely, Saminathan, is permitted to see his mother with police escort, from 20.04.2015 to 24.04.2015. The escort charges shall be borne by the respondents. The time is granted between 20.04.2015 to 24.04.2015, as the period sought for by the petitioner between 08.04.2015 and 22.04.2015 is almost over. Therefore, the second respondent is directed to release the accused on 20.04.2015 by 10.00 a.m., with necessary police escort on emergency leave to see her mother. The accused is directed to be sent back on 24.04.2015, at 5.00 p.m. The petitioner shall produce all necessary documents, along with a copy of this order, before the jail authorities to enable the respondents to pass appropriate orders. During the parole period, the accused shall abide by all the conditions prescribed in the Jail Manual. It is made clear that if the accused violates any conditions prescribed under the Act, it is open to the respondents police to initiate appropriate action against the accused. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.