E.Vishal v. The State Represented by Its

O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by Dr.Anita Sumanth J.) This Writ Petition is filed by the son of one Elangovan, who is a convict, detained in Central Prison, Puzhal. He had sought leave of 30 days without escort by way of representation dated 30.03.2026. On account of the pendency of the same, the convict had reiterated the request vide representation dated

30.03.2026, which has come to be rejected vide impugned order dated

05.05.2026 on the ground that the first representation was still pending and is being processed.

¶2When the matter was called, Mr.C.R.Malarvannan, learned counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side), who accepts notice for the respondents hands over a copy of order dated 18.05.2026, wherein, the first Page3 of 4 representation dated 30.03.2026 has been rejected on the ground of adverse report from the Probation Officer. A copy of order dated 18.05.2026 and the report of the Probation Officer are handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner in Court for onward transmission to the convict for necessary action should they so desire to proceed.

¶3Liberty is available to the convict/his family to challenge order dated

18.05.2026 in a manner known to law.

¶4We have been constantly reiterating the necessity for timely disposal of representations seeking leave and timely furnishing of order copies. We have considered an identical issue in W.P.(Crl.)No.822 of 2026, wherein we have passed the following order: Read this order in continuation of and in conjunction with order dated 16.04.2026.

¶2Circular No.TNPCS/2158/2026-PS(JA)-4 dated 07.04.2026 is produced. However that Circular only mandates the prison authorities to maintain a separate register for recording acknowledgment of service of communication/order served on convict prisoner. As far as the disposal of representation is concerned, the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982 provides for guidelines to be adhered to by the authorities in processing application seeking ordinary leave stipulating that the process should be completed within 28 days. Let this timeline be strictly adhered to.

3.With this, this writ petition is closed. No costs.

Page4 of 4 DR.ANITA SUMANTH J. AND SUNDER MOHAN J.

¶5A word of caution to the authorities to ensure that the aforesaid timelines in the aforesaid order should be adhered to scrupulously.

¶6This Writ Petition is disposed in terms of this order. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. (A.S.M.,J.) (S.M.,J.) 22-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking order SL To

¶1The State Represented by its The Director Inspector General of Prison, Chennai Range, Egmore, Chennai-600 006.

¶2The Superintendent Central Prison Puzhal-I, Chennai-600 066. AND WPMP CRL. NO. 468 OF 2026

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN AND WPMP CRL. NO. 468 OF 2026 E.Vishal S/o. Elangovan, No.42/28, Sivarajapuram, 1st Street, Pulianthope, Perambur Barracks, Perambur Barracks (Post), Chennai-600 012. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Represented by its The Director Inspector General of Prison, Chennai Range, Egmore, Chennai-600 006. 2. The Superintendent Central Prison Puzhal-I, Chennai-600 066. ..Respondent(s) PETITION filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records Page2 of 4 pertaining to the Impugned Order bearing No.CP-PUI/1702/2026-R2, dated 05- 05-2026, passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consecutively direct the respondents to grant Ordinary leave for 30 days without escort to the detenue, Elangovan S/o. Munusamy aged about 39 years, convict No. 8481, detained at Central Prison, Puzhal-I, Chennai and pass such further or other orders as this Honorable Court. For Petitioner(s): Ms.P.Divya For Respondent(s): Mr. C.R. Malarvannan, Counsel For Government Of Tamil Nadu(criminal Side)