Madras High Court
WP CRL./2584/2026 of Jeyakumari Vs Home, Prohibition and Excise Department on 1 October 2026
WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR
WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026
and
WP MP Crl. No.954 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012318942026}
Jeyakumari
W/o Jeyaprabhu,
W-5,, Pillaiyar Kovil Street,
Cumbum, VTC Kambam(M),
Uthamapalayam, Theni District,
Tamil Nadu-625 516.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Chennai Range, Chennai.
3. The Superintendent of Prison
Central Prison-I,
Puzhal, Chennai-600 066.
4. The Inspector of Police
Cumbum North Police Station,
Cumbum,
Theni District-625 516.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER:
Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarifed mandamus, calling for the records
WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026
relating to the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent in No.CP-PU1/2745/2026-R2
dated 25.08.2026, quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to grant 28 days ordinary leave without escort to the petitioners husband, namely jeyaprabhu, S/o. Rasu, Convict Prisoner No.11307, PID No.136392, presently confied at Central Prison-I, Puzhal, Chennai.
For Petitioner(s):
M/s.S.Shiney
For Respondent(s):
Mr.C.R.Malarvannan,
Additional Public Prosecutor
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N.Sathish Kumar J.) Challenging the order dated 25.08.2026 bearing No. CP-PU1/2745/2026- R2 passed by the third respondent and consequently, seeking a direction to the respondents to grant ordinary leave for 28 days without escort to the petitioners husband, namely Jeyaprabhu, S/o. Rasu, Convict Prisoner No.11307, PID No.136392, presently confined at Central Prison-I, Puzhal, Chennai, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition (criminal).
2. The impugned rejection order dated 25.08.2026 bearing No. CP- PU1/2745/2026-R2 has been passed by the third respondent mainly on the ground that the petitioner is convicted for the offence under NDPS Act and therefore, as per Memorandum of the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Chennai Range, vide No. 331/MU U 1/2026, dated 02.08.2026, the petitioner is
WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026
not eligible for ordinary leave.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, challenging the said rejection order, submitted that the petitioner is the wife of the convict prisoner and has sought ordinary leave for her husband for the purpose of welfare, livelihood and subsistence of his family, including the educational requirements of his daughter and the urgent repair of his deteriorating residential house. Hence, he seeks quashment of the impugned order by granting ordinary leave to the petitioner.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that when the statute prohibits ordinary leave, as a matter of right, the prisoner cannot claim ordinary leave.
5. We have heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on record and Rule 21 of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1985, providing non-eligibility for ordinary leave.
6. Leave is merely a concession granted to the prisoners, rather than an absolute right. When the legislature, in its wisdom, thought to extend the concession of leave to the offenders, it made it clear that leave will not be extended to certain heinous offences, which are classified under Rule 21 of the
WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026
Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982. Therefore, the prisoner cannot seek ordinary leave as a matter of right it is a concession granted to the prisoner.
7. Rule 21(c) of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982, prohibits ordinary leave for prisoners whose presence is considered dangerous or prejudicial to public peace and tranquility. Therefore, in this case, a prisoner convicted under the NDPS Act is not eligible for ordinary leave.
8. In such view of the matter, we are of the view that the impugned rejection order passed by the first respondent cannot be found fault with. Accordingly, this Writ Petition (Criminal) is dismissed. The order of rejection passed by the third respondent dated 25.08.2026 bearing No. CP- PU1/2745/2026-R2 is hereby confirmed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to seek emergency leave, as per law. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition stands closed. (N.S.K.,J.) (K.R.S.,J.) 01-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SSI
WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026
To:
1. The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Chennai Range, Chennai.
3. The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison-I, Puzhal, Chennai-600 066.
4. The Inspector of Police Cumbum North Police Station, Cumbum, Theni District-625 516.
5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. AND K.RAJASEKAR, J. SSI WP Crl. No. 2584 of 2026 01-10-2026