(Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in No.RO.TRY/108/2025.CA dated 22.02.2026 passed by the respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondent to release the petitioner's son, namely, Ravibalan, S/o.Venkadasubbu, (PID No.405958) on ordinary leave/emergency leave for 30 days for arranging medical expenses of the petitioner's son.)

N. Anand Venkatesh, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the first respondent made in No.RO.TRY/108/2025.CA dated 22.02.2026 and for a direction to the respondents to release the petitioner's son who is undergoing sentence before the Central Jail, Tiruchirapalli.

2. The petitioner's son was convicted and sentenced for the offence under the TNPID Act, by the Special Court under TNPID Act Cases, Madurai in C.C.No.33 of 2023, dated 03.03.2022. The said order was subsequently confirmed by this Court in Crl.A(MD).No.260 of 2022, by an order dated 12.03.2024 and on further appeal before the Apex Court, the sentence alone was modified to 7 years.

3. The petitioner's son is presently serving sentence in the Central Jail, Tiruchirappalli. The petitioner who is the father of the detenu submitted a representation seeking for ordinary leave on the ground that he is a aged person and he is suffering from several ailments. Apart from that, he also claimed that he is a widower and there is no one to take care of him.

4. First respondent, through the impugned proceedings dated 22.02.2026 rejected the representation of the petitioner mainly on the ground that there is a pending case in C.C.No.673 of 2022 before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul. Aggrieved by the same, present petition has been filed before this Court.

5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record.

6. It is seen from records that the petitioner's son was granted ordinary leave by this Court in W.P(MD).No.30882 of 2024 by an order dated 19.12.2024 for the period from 23.12.2024 to 08.01.2025. Apart from that, the petitioner's son was also granted emergency leave by an order passed by this Court in W.P(MD).No.2377 of 2025, dated 29.01.2025 for the period from 31.01.2025 to 07.02.2025.

7. The case that is pending against the detenu is a case of the year 2022. Even when the earlier ordinary leave and emergency leave were granted, this case was pending. Therefore, the same yardstick has to be applied while considering the request made by the petitioner seeking for ordinary leave for his son.

8. We are also taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is a widower, aged about 86 years and he has no support and he is also suffering from various ailments.

9. In the light of the above discussion, we are inclined to interfere with the order passed by the first respondent in No.RO.TRY/108/2025.CA, dated 22.02.2026 and the same is hereby set aside. There shall be a direction to the first respondent to grant ordinary leave for 21 days to the petitioner's son by imposing necessary conditions. While passing the order, instead of ordering for an escort, a direction can be given to report before the concerned jurisdictional police station daily at 5:30 PM, during the entire ordinary leave period.

10. In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the above directions.