Facts
The petitioner sought leave for her husband, a life convict serving a sentence that excluded release under statutory remission or commutation schemes before completion of 25 years’ actual imprisonment.
Source reference: p.2–5She requested 15 days’ emergency leave, relying on her health ailments and need for his support; the prison authority rejected the request because no emergency was established.
Source reference: p.2–5Her request for ordinary leave had also previously been rejected, and that decision had not been challenged.
Source reference: p.3–6Although a medical certificate was not attached to the original representation, it was included in the writ petition papers.
Source reference: p.2–5The petitioner sought, among other relief, 30 days’ ordinary leave.
Source reference: p.2–5Issues
Whether the rejection of the petitioner’s husband’s emergency-leave request should be set aside in light of the medical certificate later produced before the Court.
Source reference: p.2–5Whether the Court should grant the requested 30 days’ ordinary leave despite the earlier rejection of ordinary leave remaining unchallenged.
Source reference: p.3–6Law Applied
Rule 6 of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982 permits emergency leave for specified events, including the serious illness of certain close family members.
Source reference: p.4Rule 13 limits emergency leave to 15 days in a year, spread over four spells, with no single spell exceeding six days.
Source reference: p.4The Court also directed compliance with conditions prescribed in the Prison Manual during leave.
Source reference: p.6No judicial precedent was cited.
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The Court noted that the earlier rejection of ordinary leave had not been challenged, so the petitioner’s request for 30 days’ ordinary leave was not the basis for relief.
Source reference: p.5–6It nevertheless considered the medical certificate included with the writ papers and the prisoner’s eligibility for emergency leave.
Source reference: p.5–6Applying the six-day maximum for a single emergency-leave spell under Rule 13, the Court set aside the impugned rejection and granted six days’ leave, subject to reporting, surrender, and other conditions.
Source reference: p.5–6Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition, setting aside the rejection and directing that the prisoner be released on emergency leave without escort from 12 October 2026 to 17 October 2026, and surrender by noon on 18 October 2026.
He was required to report daily to the specified police station and comply with the other stated conditions.
Source reference: p.5–6No costs were ordered.
Source reference: p.5–6The order’s paragraph 6 introductory text refers to “6 days ordinary leave,” but the operative direction identifies the leave granted as emergency leave.
Source reference: p.5Original Court PDF
Sumaiya BanuvsThe Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
