Madras High CourtCriminal LawAdministrative and Public Law

Madras HC Grants 60-Day Furlough Without Escort To Prisoner Despite 2008 Rowdy History Sheet, Citing His Earlier Compliant Leave

Sowntheryav.The State Rep. by, The Director General of Prisons

Madras HC Grants 60-Day Furlough Without Escort To Prisoner Despite 2008 Rowdy History Sheet, Citing His Earlier Compliant Leave. Sowntherya vs The State Rep. by, The Director General of Prisons. Madras High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the prisoner’s Rowdy History Sheet and the Probation Officer’s non-recommendation justified rejecting his request for furlough.

The court held

The Court allowed the criminal writ petition and set aside the order dated 15 September 2026.

It also directed

It directed the first respondent to grant the prisoner 60 days’ furlough without escort.

During furlough, he must report daily to the fourth respondent/police at 8:30 a.m., comply with the prescribed conditions, return to the prison on completion of the period, and use the furlough only for the purpose for which it was granted.

The petitioner must produce the necessary documents, including a copy of the order, before the prison authorities.

01Facts

The petitioner, Sowntherya, sought to challenge the first respondent’s order dated 15 September 2026 rejecting 60 days’ furlough for her husband, Deepak @ Ram Deepak, a prisoner at Central Prison, Trichy.

pp. 2–3

The rejection relied on the Probation Officer’s non-recommendation, based on a Rowdy History Sheet maintained against the prisoner.

pp. 2–3

The petitioner submitted that he had previously availed leave, complied with its conditions and returned to prison without adverse incident; furlough was sought for medical reasons concerning both him and his mother.

pp. 2–3

The State opposed the petition, relying on the history sheet and the Probation Officer’s non-recommendation.

p. 3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the prisoner’s Rowdy History Sheet and the Probation Officer’s non-recommendation justified rejecting his request for furlough.

pp. 3–4

ii.2. Whether the impugned order should be set aside and the prisoner granted 60 days’ furlough without escort.

p. 2 · p. 4

03Law Applied

Under the Tamil Nadu Prisons (Release on Furlough) Rules, 2026, when furlough is sought, the prison Superintendent must obtain a verification report from the jurisdictional police station.

p. 4

The police must verify the prisoner’s place of residence, likelihood of absconding, possibility of breach of peace and potential threat to society.

p. 4

The Court also considered the prisoner’s prior compliance with leave conditions and the absence of adverse remarks during those periods.

p. 4

04Reasoning

The Court held that the existence of a history sheet did not, by itself, justify refusing furlough in the circumstances.

p. 4

The prisoner had previously been released on leave pursuant to a court order, returned to prison in compliance with the conditions, and attracted no adverse remarks during that period.

p. 4

In light of those circumstances, the Court found no justification for the impugned rejection.

p. 4

05Holding

The Court allowed the criminal writ petition and set aside the order dated 15 September 2026.

p. 4

It directed the first respondent to grant the prisoner 60 days’ furlough without escort.

p. 4

During furlough, he must report daily to the fourth respondent/police at 8:30 a.m., comply with the prescribed conditions, return to the prison on completion of the period, and use the furlough only for the purpose for which it was granted.

p. 4

The petitioner must produce the necessary documents, including a copy of the order, before the prison authorities.

p. 4
Madras High Court

Original Court PDF

SowntheryavsThe State Rep. by, The Director General of Prisons

Madras High Court · October 26, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment