Asharaf v. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by

O R D E R [Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.] Captioned Writ Petition pertains to a premature release plea.

¶2The prison inmate [convict prisoner, whom we shall be referring to as prison inmate] himself is the writ petitioner before us.

¶3Mr.R.Alagumani, learned counsel for Writ Petitioner submits that a detailed representation dated 29.07.2023 has been sent to all the three respondents. To be noted, this 29.07.2023 representation together with postal receipts evidencing despatch are as follows:

¶4Issue notice.

¶5Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor accepts notice for all three respondents.

¶6From the postal receipts, we find that the aforementioned representation though dated 29.07.2023 has been despatched only on

09.08.2023 but learned State Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that the same has been received by the respondents.

¶7Learned State Public Prosecutor also submits, on instructions, that the representation is being processed. Let the same proceed. Considering the facts and circumstances i.e., inter alia the fact that the conviction itself is of the year 1998, we direct the first respondent to decide on the aforementioned representation as expeditiously as possible but in any event within eight weeks from today i,e., by 12.12.2023. Though obvious this Bench makes it clear that the respondents and more particularly the first respondent shall decide on the premature release plea on its own merits and in accordance with law. The decision taken by the first respondent shall be communicated to the Writ Petitioner under due acknowledgement within three days from the date of decision.

¶8Captioned Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid manner. If the disposal is not in favour of the Writ Petitioner and if the Writ Petitioner has to challenge the same we make it clear that all the rights and contention of the Writ Petitioner including the points urged in the captioned Writ Petition are preserved for such an exercise. There shall be no order as to costs.

[M.S.,J.] & [R.S.V.,J.]

17.10.2023 Index : Yes/No vsm To

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home Prohibition & Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

2.The Director General of Police / Director of Prisons and Correctional Services, C.M.D.A. Towers II, No.1, Gandhi Irvin Road, Egmore, Chennai.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District.

M.SUNDAR, J. and

R.SAKTHIVEL, J. vsm W.P.(MD)No.25073 of 2023

17.10.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.10.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL W.P.(MD)No.25073 of 2023 Asharaf : Petitioner Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Prohibition & Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The Director General of Police / Director of Prisons and Correctional Services, C.M.D.A. Towers II, No.1, Gandhi Irvin Road, Egmore, Chennai. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District. : Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner by name Asharaf, son of Abdul Majeed, aged about 56 years, now confining at Madurai Central Prison under premature release on the basis of the G.O.(MS)No.1762 dated 20.07.1987 issued by the respondent No.1 on humanitarian grounds on completion of 20 years actual imprisonment and G.O.Ms.488, Home (Pri IV) Department, dated 15.11.2021 or under advisory board proceedings under Rule 341 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor.