J. Mary Regina Stella vs The State of Tamilnadu rep by

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON : 14.10.2026
PRONOUNCED ON : 04.11.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.GUNASEKARAN
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011200512026}
J. Mary Regina Stella
W/o.John,
4/8, North Street,
Odaikkarai Village,
Karislpatti Post,
Cheranmahadevi Taluk,
Tirunelveli District - 627 414.
..Petitioner
Vs
1. The State of Tamilnadu rep by
The Additional Chief Secretary to the Govt,
Home (Prisons-IV) Department,
Chief Secretariat,
Fort St.George,
Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Prisons and Correctional
Services,
Tamilnadu Prisons and correctional Services,
HQ Office,
No.6, Annai EVR Maniyammaiyar Salai,
Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
3. The Deputy Director Inspector General of Prisons
and Correctional Services,
The Office of DIG of Prisons and CS- Madurai
Range,
Arasaradi,
Madurai 625 016.
__________
Page 1 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
4. The Superintendent of Prison
Central Prison,
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli - 627 002.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Memorandum of Writ Petition (Criminal) has been filed
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of
Mandamus directing the respondent nos.1 to 3 to conduct a fair and
impartial inquiry into the representation of the petitioner dated;
23.07.2026 and based on its findings, to take appropriate criminal and
departmental action against the responsible prison authorities of Central
Prison, Palayamkottai within such time as may be stipulated by this
Court.
For Petitioner(s): M/s Henri Patrick Tiphange
M/s R.Karunanidhi
M/s K.R.Raja
For Respondent(s): Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandiyan,
Additional Public Prosecutor (takes
Notice)
Counter Affidavit Filed
D.No 5929/2026 Dt;05/10/2026
Report Received(mail Copy)
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N.GUNASEKARAN, J)

1. Case of the petitioner in brief reads as follows :
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
the husband of the petitioner viz., John, son of Thiraviam, aged about 68
years is undergoing life imprisonment at the Central Prison,
Palayamkottai since 2017. He had developed a lump on his shoulder for
__________
Page 2 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
which he required medical treatment and surgery. As the prison
authorities failed to provide timely medical treatment despite repeated
representations, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.
(Crl.)(MD) No.2420 of 2026 and as per order, directions were issued to
provide appropriate medical treatment to her husband. Subsequently, he
underwent surgery and was returned to the prison. He further submitted
that in retaliation for seeking such judicial intervention, the husband of
the petitioner was subjected to threats, intimidation, physical assault and
humiliation by certain prison officials particularly Jailer Mr.Muniyandi.
It is alleged that the said Jailer had slapped her husband on his cheek in
the presence of other prisoners and abused him in a filthy language with
dire consequences including a threat to arrange his post-mortem inside
the prison. It is further submitted that the husband of the petitioner is
suffering from severe deterioration of eyesight and the same is to be
attended by the specialist on medical examination with treatment. In the
context, the petitioner had submitted her representation dated;
23.07.2026 and for which, the fourth respondent had issued a reply dated;
05.08.2026 bearing Ref.No.3927/Thagu-3/2026 by denying the
allegations and attributing misconduct of her husband. He would further
contend that the said reply was issued on the basis of the report of the
officials functioning within the same prison administration and hence, it
__________
Page 3 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
did not constitute an independent inquiry into the specific allegations of
assault, intimidation and retaliatory treatment. The allegations attributed
to the husband of the petitioner were specifically disputed and it was
contended that the relevant prison records, medical records, medical
camp attendance registers, CCTV footage, duty rosters and statements of
prisoners who witnessed the alleged incident required independent
examination. Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that in view of
the serious allegations against the prison officials and the petitioner's
husband's vulnerability as an elderly prisoner under their custody, an
independent and impartial inquiry by an appropriate senior authority is
necessary. It was further contended that adequate protection should be
provided to the husband of the petitioner against any further retaliation
and that, if the allegations were substantiated, appropriate criminal and
departmental proceedings should be initiated against the concern
responsible prison authorities. Accordingly, the learned counsel prayed
that this Court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent nos.1
to 3 to conduct a fair and impartial inquiry into the representation of the
petitioner dated; 23.07.2026 and on findings, to take appropriate action
in accordance with law.
__________
Page 4 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
2). Submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondents is as follows:
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that on
16.07.2026, the husband of the petitioner had refused to undergo a search
being conducted by the prison personnel and entered into an argument
with them by using improper and filthy language. He further shouted that
his daughter was an Advocate and that he would take action against the
prison administration through her. It was further submitted that when he
was instructed to attend physical exercise in accordance with the routine
practice of the prison, he refused to do so, behaved rudely towards the
prison staff and threatened them with legal action and other
consequences. The Block Officer in-charge reported the incident to the
Jailor, who personally visited the block. As the prisoner continued to
behave improperly and used indecent language, a complaint was recorded
in the Jailor's Report Book. He further submitted that the petitioner's
husband had undergone surgical excision of a lipoma on 16.06.2026 and
was discharged from the hospital on 17.06.2026, following which he was
admitted to the Central Prison, Palayamkottai. Nearly a month thereafter,
on 16.07.2026, he was instructed to attend physical exercise but refused
to comply with the instructions of the prison authorities. It was contended
that the incident was witnessed by the prison personnel and other
__________
Page 5 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
prisoners, whose statements were obtained during the enquiry conducted
by the Superintendent of Prison. Based on the statements and the
materials collected, the Superintendent examined the circumstances of the
incident and arrived at a conclusion regarding the prisoner's misconduct.
The details of the incident were also communicated to the petitioner in
the reply issued to her representation dated 23.07.2026. The learned
Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted that there had been no
violation of the rights of any prisoner in the Central Prison,
Palayamkottai. It was stated that judicial officers, officials of the District
Legal Services Authority and senior prison officials regularly visited the
prison and interacted with prisoners, providing them with opportunities to
submit their grievances. The prison authorities had also been providing
necessary medical treatment and care to prisoners through the Prison
Medical Officer. It was further contended that the petitioner's husband
had been provided with medical treatment, including surgery for the
lipoma and that he had subsequently been given advice and counselling
by the prison authorities. Finally, he submitted that the present writ
petition had been filed at the instance of the petitioner's husband,
following the action taken by the prison authorities in respect of his
alleged misconduct, and that the allegations of assault, threats,
intimidation and retaliatory treatment against the prison officials were
__________
Page 6 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
false and contrary to the prison records. Therefore, the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition as devoid
of merits.
3). Both side heard. Records perused. The case of the petitioner is
that her husband viz; John being a convict undergoing life sentence in the
Central Prison at Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli is suffering from severe loss
of vision and in spite of the same, on 16.07.2026, at about 06.30 a.m., he
was harassed and slapped his cheek by the Jailor viz; Muniyandi in the
presence of other inmates in front of the gate of Block no.11 in the
prison which caused him humiliation, indignity and mental agony and as
a result, the petitioner had submitted a representation dated; 23.07.2026
to take necessary action and for which, the fourth respondent herein had
issued a reply bearing No.3927/THAGU-3/2026 dated; 05.08.2026
containing false and frivolous allegation against her husband and hence,
sought the order of this Court in this writ petition criminal to direct the
respondent nos.1 to 3 to conduct a fair and impartial inquiry into this
matter and on its finding, to take appropriate criminal and departmental
action against the erring officials of the prison.
In contra, the respondents through the counter affidavit of
the fourth respondent would deny all the allegation levelled against the
__________
Page 7 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
prison authorities as false by stating that the conduct and character of the
husband of the petitioner is not upto mark since he behaved in a improper
manner by using indecent language under the pretext of his daughter
being a practicing advocate and hence, sought to dismiss the application.
4). In the context, the Rule No.305 of the Tamil Nadu Prison
Rules, 2024 mandates that the prison discipline is the prime mover of a
dynamic and interactive human mechanism called the correctional
process, which an offender undergoes to get reformed into a law-abiding
and dignified citizen, who can become self-reliant after his/her release
and deserve a rightful place in the mainstream of the society. Further,
Rule No.299(11) of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 2024 requires the
prisoners to practice Yoga and Meditation daily on a fixed time as a part
of their welfare. In addition, Rule No.306 of the Tamil Nadu Prison
Rules, 2024 cast the duty upon the prisoners to obey the orders of all the
officers of prison.
5). The counter affidavit of the fourth respondent would disclose
that the John / life convict was reluctant to participate in such physical
exercise and raised objection in unruly manner under the pretext of his
daughter being a practicing advocate and the said fact was recorded in the
__________
Page 8 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
Jailor Report Book.
6). The respondents had also produced a letter along with the
discharge summary of Tirunelveli Government Medical College Hospital
for the petitioner’s husband, dated 17.06.2026, together with the case
sheet. The counter affidavit of the respondent and the medical report of
the Medical Officer of Central Prison, Palayamkottai dated 10.09.2026
would disclose that Medical Camp and an Eye Camp were conducted on
15.07.2026, 16.07.2026 and 17.07.2026. The petitioner's husband not
attended the Medical Camp but insisted that he should be taken to the
Tirunelveli Government Medical College Hospital for treatment for his
vision-related problem. On 03.08.2026, he complained of defective vision
and insisted to take to the Tirunelveli Government Medical College
Hospital. Accordingly, on 08.08.2026, he was referred to the said
hospital, where he was admitted. Cataract surgery performed on his right
eye on 10.08.2026, and he was discharged on 13.08.2026. Thereafter, he
was readmitted to the Central Prison, Palayamkottai. The aforesaid
medical report dated 10.09.2026 is extracted below:
__________
Page 9 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
__________
Page 10 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
The such medical report would also disclose that the husband of the
petitioner was sent to respective block with advice to continue his
medicine regularly since he was not willing to get admitted in Central
Prison Dispensary at Palayamkottai.
7). The petitioner's husband allegedly behaved in a defiant manner,
failed to attend the physical drill and resisted the search of his cell, which
is a routine procedure and the same are recorded in the Jailor's Report
Book. The petitioner's husband was referred to a Psychologist, who
examined him and submitted a report, which is extracted below:
__________
Page 11 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
8). In the scenario, it is to note that following are the safeguards
prescribed under law to redress the grievance of the prisoner, if any:
8.1. Rule No.298 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 2024 denotes
the establishment of the “ Grievance Redressal System ” in the each of
the prison with its composition to fulfil the following scope and
objectives:
“ Voicing resentment/grievance is an elementary human instinct. If
it is suppressed, it can lead to an aberrant frame of mind which will be
detrimental to natural and healthy growth of body and mind therefore;
__________
Page 12 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
(i) There shall be an active Grievance Redressal System (G.R.S.) in
every prison which will provide every inmate the legitimate opportunity
to voice his grievances;
(ii) The system will also act as a safety valve against any
possibility of sudden outbursts of suppressed grievances;
(iii) There shall be one or more complaint boxes in every prison
installed in centrally located and convenient places, within easy reach of
the inmates. Such complaint box shall also be installed in an easily
accessible place in the female ward;
(iv) The inmates may drop their complaints in the form of written
petitions addressed to the Superintendent, or to the higher authorities,
into such boxes;
(v) The box shall remain under lock and key and the key shall
remain in the custody of the Jailer, who shall unlock the complaint box at
least twice a week on the days fixed and approved by the Superintendent;
(vi) The complaint box shall be opened at appointed time before
the evening locking up of the Prison;
(vii) The Superintendent shall form a permanent Committee of
Grievance Redressal System comprising himself, the Jailer (the
seniormost Jailer in the event of more than one Jailer being posted
there), the Chief Medical Officer, and the Welfare Officer;
(viii) The committee shall meet as and when necessary, but at least
twice a week to look into all the complaints of the inmates;
(ix) The Superintendent shall preside over the committee which
shall enquire into all the complaints at the earliest;
(x) The decision of the committee shall be executed forthwith;
(xi) Complaints addressed to the higher authorities shall be
forwarded to the addressee with comments of the Superintendent without
__________
Page 13 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
delay;
(xii) Letters addressed by prisoners to the Government, Judiciary,
Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services or other high
functionaries should be forwarded to them immediately without being
censored and a dated receipt of it should be given to the prisoner. The
receiving authority should acknowledge letters immediately and look
promptly into them;
(xiii) The District Judge should visit each prison in his
jurisdiction once a month and give an opportunity to all the prisoners
to present their grievances or requests, if they so desire, in the absence
of Prison Officers. This should be a statutory function of the District
Judge;
(xiv) The system of taking weekly rounds of inspection of Prisons
by the Superintendents should be made statutory by including it in
Prisons Act. If a prisoner is not satisfied by the action taken by the
Superintendent on his complaint, he should be allowed to approach
higher authorities for redressal of his grievances;
(xv) The Board of Visitors should be activated. The visitors should
receive and enquire into prisoners’ complaints and grievances and send
their suggestions to appropriate authorities.”
8.2. Rule No.556 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 2024
mandates the availability of legal aid to the prisoners by facilitating
appointment of jail visiting advocates to legal services clinic in the
prison. In view of the same, the National Legal Services Authority had
framed Standard Operating Procedures on Access to Legal Aid Services
__________
Page 14 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
to Prisoners and Functioning of the Prison Legal Aid Clinics, 2022 on the
eve of “ Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav ” to celebrate and commemorate 75
years of progressive independent India had set up Prison Legal Aid Clinic
(PLAC) in the prison on joint working of Para-legal volunteers and Jail
visiting lawyers with one among the aim is to act as One Stop Centre
(OSC) to raise the grievances by prisoners and direct the grievances to
appropriate authorities through District Legal Services Authority
(DLSA). One among their duty is to bring into the notice of District
Legal Services Authority (DLSA) about the concern of inmates in respect
of conditions in jail and to assist the inmate in filing any complaint or
grievances relating to their stay in prison. It requires the respective
Chairman (Principal District and Sessions Judge) and Secretary (Sub
Judge) to the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to visit the Prison
Legal Aid Clinic periodically within time frame to inspect the Prison
Legal Aid Clinic and to understand any concerns regarding the prison
conditions on having interaction with the prisoners. It further enables the
set up of complaint box in the Prison Legal Aid Clinic under lock and key
with the Chairman or Secretary so as to encourage the prisoners to raise
their grievances without any fear.
8.3. Further, in consequent to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in Sunil Batra -vs- Delhi Administration (AIR 1980 SC
__________
Page 15 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
1579), this Court had already issued a circular dated; 04.10.1996 in
ROC.No.3616-A/96/F1 having reiterated vide circular in
ROC.No.3000-A/2003/F1 and ROC.No.1282/2006/RG/RR dated;
16.09.2003 and 26.07.2006, respectively, requiring the Principal District
and Sessions Judge having accompanied by the Chief Judicial Magistrate
of every district to make a periodical surprise visit to the prison as
mentioned therein to ensure conditions in the prison conform to certain
minimum standards of maintenance, health, hygiene, institutional
treatment and discipline and to make expeditious enquiries into the
grievance of the prisoner and take corrective action as found necessary to
uphold human rights of the prisoners, and to submit report to the High
Court.
8.4. Rule No.299(18) of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 2024
establishes the “ Prisoners' Panchayat ” in the prison enabling the
prisoners to express their problems and seek redressal by requiring the
Superintendent or Jailor to participate in the same having monitored by
prison administration.
8.5. Rule No.299(20) of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 2024 to
hold “ Maha Panchayat ” in the presence of Superintendent of Prison
once in a quarter for redressal of prisoners' grievances and
implementation of their suggestions by requiring the Director General of
__________
Page 16 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
Prisons and Correctional Service to participate in the same in different
prisons in the state from time to time.
It is not the case of the petitioner that she had invoked the
extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court in writ on exhausting any one of
such prescribed safeguards.
9). Pending this writ petition, as per the order of this Court dated;
22.09.2026, the Chairman, District Legal Services Authority, Tirunelveli
had visited the Central Prison at Palayamkottai and conducted an inquiry
and submitted his report dated; 05.10.2026 in D.No.5929/2026 along with
the statement from the Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai, the
Sub-Inspector of Police (Technical) and the petitioner's husband.
10). From the report, it is seen that the petitioner's husband was
examined in the presence of a Psychologist. Dr.Mohamed Aadil
confirming the detenu exhibited psychological complaints and that his
behaviour was found to be abnormal, when he was questioned in a
negative manner, resulting in sudden and repulsive reactions.
11). The report further revealed that the CCTV footage was not
available, as 35 days had elapsed.
12). Though the report indicates that the Jail Superintendent lacked
a proactive approach, it also records that the Jail Superintendent was
making commendable efforts in administering the prison and managing
__________
Page 17 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
such a large number of inmates.
13). In his statement, the petitioner's husband confirm that, except
for the incident dated 16.07.2026, he had otherwise been treated well and
was in good condition in the prison at all times.
14). It is seen that the accommodation capacity of the Central
Prison, Palayamkottai, is 1,332, whereas approximately 1,850 persons are
presently lodged therein. The Superintendent and other prison officials
are managing the inmates and ensuring that they adhere to the prison
rules, behave in discipline. Searching prison cells is part of the routine
exercise. Likewise, insisting on physical drills for the benefit of inmates,
so that, they do not develop diabetes.
15). As regards the petitioner, it is recorded that, in the event of
unwillingness, the prison authorities do not insist upon or compel the
prisoners to participate in physical drills. Thus, though there have been
certain aberrations, the same do not warrant any further probe in this
matter.
16). From the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent, it is
seen that the petitioner's representation dated 23.07.2026 had already
been considered and disposed of on 05.08.2026.
17). In view of the petitioner’s representation dated 27.10.2025,
already considered and disposed of, the Writ Petition has become
__________
Page 18 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
infructuous.
18). Recording the same, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No
costs.
(M.N.K.,J.) (N.G.N.,J.)
04-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
PAL
To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Govt,
Home (Prisons-IV) Department,
Chief Secretariat,
Fort St.George,
Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services,
Tamilnadu Prisons and correctional Services,
HQ Office,
No.6, Annai EVR Maniyammaiyar Salai,
Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
3. The Deputy Director Inspector General of Prisons and Correctional
Services,
The Office of DIG of Prisons and CS- Madurai Range,
Arasaradi,
Madurai 625 016.
4. The Superintendent of Prison
Central Prisons,
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli - 627 002.
5. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 19 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
AND
N.GUNASEKARAN, J.
PAL
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5169 of 2026
04-11-2026
__________
Page 20 of 20
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:45:14 pm )