Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

“2.The question that arises for consideration is whether this Court can exercise its power to grant interim bail after the sentencing part is over. Though the earlier Division Bench of this Court has granted interim bail, we are of the prima facie view that once the sentencing part is over by the Court and the Government is seized of the remission proceedings, the matter in respect of grant of interim bail requires detailed deliberations. In this connection, Mr.John Sathyan, learned Senior Counsel is requested to assist the Court.”

9.Whereas, Mr.R.John Sathyan, learned Amicus Curiae, would submit that the release of the convict prisoners is governed by Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as “Suspension of Sentence Rules”). As far as temporary release is concerned, certain categories of leave have been classified under the Suspension of Sentence https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 01:09:35 pm )  W.P.No.30216 of 2024, etc. batch Rules to various prisoners per year, after completion of certain period of sentence. Therefore, at present, as per law, the prisoners are entitled to be temporarily released only as per the Suspension of Sentence Rules. Further, it is his contention that Rule 40 of the Suspension of Sentence Rules gives power to the Government to exempt any person from any or all provisions of the Rules and grant leave. In this regard, the Full Bench of this Court, in State v. Yesu @ Velaiyan reported in (2011) 5 CTC 353, has clearly indicated that the entire Suspension of Sentence Rules may be exempted in respect of any prisoner for valid reasons. Similarly, the another Full Bench of this Court in T.Ramalakshmi v. State reported in 2025 (1) LW (Crl.) 310, has reiterated the view of the earlier Full Bench in Yesu's case (supra). Therefore, it is his contention that the Government can exempt any or all of the provisions of the Suspension of Sentence Rules to the benefit of the prisoners. Hence, it is his contention that without invoking such power of exemption retained by the Government, just burdening the Courts to grant interim bail by stating No Objection is not proper as per law. It is his contention that, once sentencing part is over and the accused is not in the custody of the Court, grant of bail by the Court by exercising its power https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 01:09:35 pm )  W.P.No.30216 of 2024, etc. batch under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not correct. Hence, it is his contention that the interim orders passed by the Apex Court exercising its power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, cannot be taken as precedent.

41.Though an order granting extension of leave, passed by one of us while sitting in a Division Bench earlier, in H.C.P.No.2302 of 2017, dated 24.01.2018, is now brought to our notice, we are of the view that the same will not be a binding precedent, as the Bench had not discussed the provisions of the law in that matter while granting such relief.

42.In the present cases on hand, the petitioners seek remission of sentence and premature release of the convict prisoners, which has to be considered by the appropriate Government by considering various factors as detailed above. Therefore, as a matter of right, premature release cannot be sought before this Court. As already held, when the sentencing part is already over and the Court is ceased to have the custody of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 01:09:35 pm )  W.P.No.30216 of 2024, etc. batch accused/convict, bail or interim bail cannot be sought before this Court. At the most, the prisoners are entitled to seek suspension of sentence as per Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982. If the Government is benevolent enough in giving “No Objection” for grant of interim bail before this Court, the Government, if is really of the view that the accused/convict prisoners are entitled to temporary release, having retained their power under Rule 40 of the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982, to exempt any or all the provisions of the Suspension of Sentence Rules, may invoke such power and exempt any or all the provisions in favour of any accused/convicts, taking note of their eligibility, and grant temporary release for any period as they decide. Instead of doing so, the Government, by allowing the prisoners to stay outside by just giving “No objection” before this Court to grant interim bail, in the view of this Court, is in fact, shirking its responsibility rather than addressing the grievance of the prisoners. When the Government has retained the power under Rule 40 of the Suspension of Sentence Rules to exempt the provisions under the Rules, such power can be exercised in deserving cases to temporarily release any convict prisoner or to extend their period of leave to a longer period, which https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 01:09:35 pm )  W.P.No.30216 of 2024, etc. batch has not been done at any point of time, not even in a single case.

43.Therefore, as the Full Bench of this Court in Yesu's case (supra), has clearly held that, it is the Government who can exercise its discretionary power under Rule 40 of the Suspension of Sentence Rules to exempt any or all the provisions under the Rule, it is high time for the Government to exercise such power in deserving cases to grant temporary release or suspension of sentence for any period of time to the convict prisoners undergoing sentence, taking note of the various factors, instead of relegating the matters to the Court for grant of interim bail, as we have already held that power to grant interim bail after sentencing part is over, is not with the Court. In view of the above discussion, we are of the view that the miscellaneous petitions or writ petitions seeking interim bail/leave or extension of interim bail/leave before this Court by invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly when the matter is pending consideration before the Government for premature release of the convict prisoner, are not maintainable. Accordingly, W.P.M.P.(Crl.) Nos.530, 531, 532, 533, 583, 584 of 2025 and W.P.(Crl.) Nos.1113, 1114, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 01:09:35 pm )  W.P.No.30216 of 2024, etc. batch 1115, 1116, 1117, 1119, 1121 of 2025 are dismissed.