Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Noufiya N vs State Of Kerala on 25 January, 2024

Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas

Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
     THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 5TH MAGHA, 1945
                       WP(CRL.) NO. 84 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          NOUFIYA N
          AGED 24 YEARS
          W/O ANZAKKIR, ANZAKKIR MANZIL, AMBALATHIN VILLA,
          KARAKKAMANDAPAM, NEMOM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.,
          PIN - 695020.

          BY ADVS.
          VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN
          B.ANUSREE
          MIRAL K.JOY
          ABHILASH C.V.
          VARUN JACOB


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE HOME DEPARTMENT,
          GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

    2     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL HOME
          PRISONS HEADQUARTERS, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.,
          PIN - 695012.

    3     THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
          CENTRAL PRISON AND CORRECTIONAL HOME, POOJAPPURA,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695012.


          SRI. M.C. ASHI (PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP (Crl). No. 84 of 2024
                                    2




                 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
               ...................................................
                  WP (Crl). No. 84 of 2024
           .................................................................
           Dated this the 25th day of January, 2024


                              JUDGMENT

Petitioner's husband is a convict in S.C.No.735/2017 before the files of Assistant Sessions Court, Neyyattinkara. He was found guilty for the offence of murder under Section 302 Of I.P.C and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

2. According to the petitioner, her son who is aged only four years, is about to undergo a circumcision and as per their religious belief's it is an important function requiring the presence of the father of the child.

3. Sri. Vishnu Bhuvanendran, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently pleaded that the ceremony is that of the only child of the petitioner and the function requires petitioner's husband's presence.

4. Sri. Ashi M.C. learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand pointed out that petitioner's request for leave for her husband was rejected by Exhibit P3, as it was beyond the WP (Crl). No. 84 of 2024 3 scope of the rules for grant of leave.

5. While considering the claim for grant of leave, Rule 400 of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional (Management) Rules, 2014 cannot be ignored. As per Rule 400 of the said Rules, the scope of grant of emergency leave is limited to certain specific instances. None of the instances specified therein are satisfied in the instant case.

6. Apart from the above, the ceremony of circumcision and its date are all matters of choice for the prisoner and his family. If a particular date has been chosen, notwithstanding the incarceration being undergone by the prisoner, the same cannot compel the authorities to grant leave on that particular day. Unlike situations where there is no choice, or the rules provide for granting leave, then the prisoner cannot be faulted for choosing a date of his choice. However, when the dates are fixed unmindful of the incarceration, then the convict will have to face the risk of being denied leave.

7. This Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that once leave is granted for each religious function in the family, there will be innumerable such requests as functions are plenty, where leave will have to be granted. Therefore, this Court is of WP (Crl). No. 84 of 2024 4 the view that the circumcision ceremony of a child is not a reason for grant of ordinary or emergency leave to a convict.

Hence I decline the relief sought for by the petitioner. The writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE Rvm WP (Crl). No. 84 of 2024 5 APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 84/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08.01.2024 OF THE MUSLIM JAMA-ATH, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY PAROLE DATED 12.01.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON BEHALF OF HER HUSBAND, ANZAKKIR.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 13.01.2024 REJECTING THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER SEEKING PAROLE FOR HER HUSBAND.