Ordinary leave may be granted without police escort absent adverse conduct during prior leave.

The petitioner, son of A.M. Abdul Hakkim, a life convict detained at Central Prison, Trichy, sought ordinary leave for his father so that he could assist the family in making financial arrangements, as he was stated to be its sole breadwinner.

By order dated 10 August 2026, the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons granted 28 days’ ordinary leave but imposed the condition that the leave be availed with police escort.

The petitioner challenged that condition, stating that the convict had previously availed leave without escort without any untoward incident or adverse remark, and that the family was unable to provide food and accommodation for the escort personnel.

He sought modification of the condition from “with escort” to “without escort”.

Whether the condition requiring the convict prisoner to avail 28 days’ ordinary leave with police escort should be modified to permit leave without escort, considering the family’s circumstances and the prisoner’s previous conduct during unescorted leave.

What conditions should govern the convict prisoner’s ordinary leave if unescorted leave is granted.

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to examine the legality and propriety of the escort condition imposed while granting prison leave.

It applied the relevant principles governing ordinary leave under the Jail Manual, including the requirement that a released convict comply with prescribed conditions, report as directed, return to prison on expiry of leave, and use the leave only for the purpose for which it was granted.

The Court balanced the stated financial and familial need for the convict’s presence against the justification for requiring police escort.

It found material significance in the fact that the convict had previously availed leave without escort and that no untoward incident or adverse remark had been recorded during those occasions.

In light of those circumstances, the Court considered police escort unnecessary and directed that the ordinary leave be granted without escort.

To address supervision and ensure compliance, it imposed reporting obligations, required the convict to return to prison on completion of leave, and made the leave subject to the Jail Manual and its stated purpose.

During the leave, he was required to report daily at 6:30 p.m. before the Inspector of Police, B-4 Race Course Police Station, Coimbatore; report back to the Superintendent of Central Prison, Trichy, on expiry of the leave; comply with all conditions under the Jail Manual; and use the leave only for the purpose for which it was granted.

The petitioner was directed to submit the necessary documents and a copy of the order to the jail authorities.

The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.