T.V. RAFFY vs STATE OF KERALA

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 1 2026:KER:78850

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
TH
TUESDAY, THE 13 DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 / 21ST ASWINA, 1948
WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
T.V. RAFFY
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. VARKEY, THANIKKAL HOUSE,
KANDASSAMKADAVU DESOM, KARAMUCK VILLAGE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680613
BY ADV SRI.VISHNUPRASAD NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS & CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
PRISONS HEAD QUARTERS,
POOJAPURA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695012
3 THE SUPERINTENDENT
CENTRAL PRISON & CORRECTIONAL HOME,
KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670004

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 2 2026:KER:78850

BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
OTHER PRESENT:
PP-SRI.SAMEER.S.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.10.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 3 2026:KER:78850

“C.R.”
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition concerns the parameters for
considering ordinary leave sought for by a convict
undergoing sentence. Ext.P7 Order is under challenge in
this Writ Petition, which rejected the petitioner’s
son’s application for ordinary leave in terms of Rule
397 of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services
(Management) Rules, 2014 (for short, the Rules). The
specific reason stated in Ext.P7 is the adverse police
report and the probation report, which are made mention
of in Rule 397(h) of the Rules.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that
other accused persons, convicted in the same case, have
already been granted ordinary leave under Rule 397. In
their case also, there were adverse police and probation
reports. However, they approached this Court; and by

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 4 2026:KER:78850

virtue of Ext.P2 judgment, this Court directed their
release. The petitioner’s son is also entitled to
similar treatment, is the contention urged. It was then
submitted that the contents of the police report and the
probation report are also not in accord with the
requirements of Rule 397(h) of the Rules. On such
premise, the petitioner seeks Ext.P7 to be set aside.
3. This was seriously opposed by the learned Public
Prosecutor, pointing out that ordinary leave cannot be
granted, if the police report and the probation report
are against the prisoner/convict. Referring to Rule
397(h), learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the
possibility of a law and order situation, has to be
considered by the police, while preferring the report.
Acting upon that mandate, the police officer considered
the same, and preferred the report indicating a possible
law and order situation in the locality. Referring to
the probation report, it was pointed out that the

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 5 2026:KER:78850

petitioner’s son belongs to a gang of goons and that
there exists a rival gang, which points to a sure
possibility of a law and order situation, if the convict
is released.
4. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
respective parties, this Court is of the opinion that
Ext.P7 cannot be sustained.
5. Primarily, this Court notice that persons, who are
similarly placed like the petitioner’s son have been
given ordinary leave as per Ext.P2 judgment of this
Court. There also, the police and probation reports
were against the said prisoners. This Court, in Ext.P2
judgment, relied upon another judgment in Rama v. State
of Kerala [2023 KHC 851], which held that it is the duty
of the police authorities to maintain law and order; and
for that reason, the entitlement for ordinary leave in
terms of Rule 397 cannot be denied. The findings in

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 6 2026:KER:78850

Rama (supra) were quoted with approval by the learned
Single Judge in Ext.P2, to set aside the impugned Order
therein and to direct release of the petitioner therein
on ordinary leave. This Court is in agreement with the
findings in Rama (supra) as quoted in Ext.P2. A mere
possibility of a law and order situation, which is not
otherwise substantiated by sufficient facts and cogent
materials, cannot be a ground to deny ordinary leave,
which partakes the character of an entitlement of the
convict in terms of Rule 397, upon expiry of the period
stipulated therein.
6. Secondly, this Court frowns upon the police report
and the probation report relied on in Ext.P7 rejection
Order. The said reports are produced by the learned
st
Public Prosecutor as per memo dated 21 July, 2026.
The requirements in terms of Rule 397(h) can be
dissected first. Rule 397(h) is extracted herebelow:-

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 7 2026:KER:78850

“(എച്ച്) അവധി അനുവദിക്കാനുള്ള ഓരോ അപേക്ഷയ ോടുമൊപ്പം
തടവുകാരന് അവധി അനുവദിക്കുന്നതുമൂലം ക്രമസമാധാനത്തിന ോ
പ്രത്യേകിച്ച് തടവുകാരന്റെ സ്വന്തം സുരക്ഷിതത്വത്തിന ോ മറ്റുള്ളവരുടെ
സുരക്ഷയ്ക്കോ, പ്രതികൂലമാണ ോ എന്നും, തടവുകാരൻ ഒളിച്ചോടുന്നതിന്
സാധ്യതയുണ്ടോ എന്നും, മുമ്പ് അവധിയിലായിരുന്നപ്പോഴുള്ള മോശമായ
ഏതെങ്കിലും പെരുമാറ്റത്തിന്റെ ചരിത്രവുമുണ്ടെങ്കിൽ അതിന്റെ അനുബന്ധ
വിവരങ്ങളും ബന്ധപ്പെട്ട പ ോലീസ് സബ് ഇൻസ്പെക്ടറുടെ റിപ്പോർട്ടിൽ
ഉണ്ടായിരിക്കണം. ജയിൽ സൂപ്രണ്ട് ജയിലിലെ തടവുകാരന്റെ സ്വഭാവവും
മുൻകാലചരിത്രവും ഇതുവരെ അനുഭവിച്ചിട്ടുള്ള അവധിയുടെ
വിശദവിവരങ്ങളും സഹിതം വ്യക്തമായ ശുപാർശ നൽകേണ്ടതാണ്.
ഇത ോടൊപ്പം കുടുംബപരം, മറ്റു സാമൂഹ്യപശ്ചാത്തലം,
അവധിക്കാലയളവിലെ സാമൂഹ്യ സ്വീകാര്യത എന്നിവ സംബന്ധിച്ചുള്ള
വിശദാന്വേഷണ റിപ്പോർട്ട് ജില്ലാ പ്രൊബേഷൻ ഓഫീസറിൽനിന്നും
ലഭ്യമാക്കിയിരിക്കണം. ഇത്തരം റിപ്പോർട്ടുകൾ ആദ്യ സാധാരണ അവധി
അനുവദിക്കാൻ ആവശ്യമാണ്.”
7. It could be seen from the above that the parameters
for consideration in the police report are:-
i. Whether the release of the convict will cause any
law and order situation in the locality, especially

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 8 2026:KER:78850

to the safety and security of the convict, as also,
others?
ii. Whether there exists any possibility for the
convict to abscond?
iii. Whether there is any history of bad behavior by
the convict, during his earlier release on leave?
8. That apart, the conduct of the convict in the jail,
his character, previous history etc has to be certified
by the Jail Superintendent.
9. Now, coming to the report by the Probation Officer,
the following are the requirements:-
i. The family and the social status of the convict;
and
ii. The social acceptance of the convict during the
period of leave.
10. In the Police report dated 8/4/2025, what is stated
is an alleged enquiry conducted by the Additional

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 9 2026:KER:78850

Superintendent of Police to certain persons, without
even indicating their locus and how they are acquainted
with the convict. It is not even stated whether they
are neighbours or persons residing in the locality. A
general comment by one or two among such persons to the
effect that there exist s a possibility of law and order
situation is far too insufficient for the Officer to
arrive at a conclusion that there is a real threat to
law and order in the locality. A satisfaction in this
regard has to be arrived at by the Officer
independently, after assessing all relevant materials
and inputs; and not on the basis of the ipse dixit of
certain persons, even if it is assumed that they are
neighbours. Another aspect mentioned in the police
report is with respect to the bad conduct of the
convict’s friends and that they are involved in several
crimes. It is not clear from the report that the
persons whose names mentioned therein are co-accused

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 10 2026:KER:78850

along with the convict in the Sessions Case, where he
is convicted. Nothing is stated in the police report as
to how the convict’s friends’ conduct would stand in
the way of the convict’s release on ordinary leave. In
the absence of any cogent material suggesting a live
link between the convict and his friends, thus pointing
to the propensity or possibility of the convict
indulging in a crime while on leave, the bad conduct of
the convict's friends, by itself, cannot be taken stock
of to reject ordinary leave.
11. Coming to the probation officer’s report, all what
is required, and liable to be looked into, is the family
and social background of the convict, as also, his
social acceptance. As against these requirements, the
probation officer has chosen to state that the convict
was a member of a gang of criminals and that he was
imprisoned for the murder of one Adarsh, who is a member

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 11 2026:KER:78850

of a rival gang. It appears that these considerations
made by the probation officer are beyond the caveat of
Rule 397(h) of the Rules. Importantly, these aspects do
not find a place in the police report. The police
report and the probation report, both, are flawed, and
Ext.P7 Order issued, in reliance of the same, also
cannot be sustained. Ext.P7 will stand set aside. There
nd
will be a direction to the 2 respondent to grant
ordinary leave to the petitioner's son (Convict prisoner
No.181/2024 of the Central Prison and Correctional Home,
Kannur District), subject to the usual conditions
nd
imposed. The 2 respondent will fix the period of leave
taking into account the mandate under Rule 397(b) of the
Rules, in accordance with law.
12. The Station House Officer (Anthikkad Police
Station), within whose limits the convict resides, will
ensure that there occurs no law and order situation on

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 12 2026:KER:78850

account of the release of the convict. If necessary,
surveillance in the area can be arranged, till the
convict returns to the jail. Necessary instruction in
this regard will be given by the learned Public
Prosecutor to the Station House Officer concerned.
The Writ Petition (Crl) is allowed, as indicated above.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
JUDGE
ska

CNR : KLHC010404382026

WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026 13 2026:KER:78850

APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) NO. 862 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 27/1/2026
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30/7/2025
PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.(CRL.)
NO. 924/2025
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. KPCS/3968/2025-
WP2 DATED 21/8/2025 ISSUED BY THE DIG,
PRISONS
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.
C.P.K./R185/24(17-46) DATED 26/8/2025 ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4/12/2025
PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.(CRL) NO.
1573/2025
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16/3/2026
PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.(CRL.)
NO. 370/2026
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.
KPCS/947/2026-WP2 DATED 17/4/2026 PASSED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT