Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

On Appeal, the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 11.05.1999 in Death Reference Case No.1 of 1998 with C.A.No.323 of 1998, acquitted the petitioner from all charges under TADA Act, and confirmed his conviction only u/s.120 B r/w 302 IPC and altered his death penalty to life imprisonment, by a majority order of the three Hon'ble Judges Bench.
During the confinement period the petitioner had filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.3 of 2009 before the TADA Court at City Civil Court Complex, Chennai for an initial recommendation to classify him as `A' Class prisoner. The Trial Court vide order dated 27.01.2009 upheld the petitioner's eligibility for 'A' class prisoner and directed the petitioner to approach the competent authority through the Superintendent of Prisons for classification of 'A' class and directed the competent authorities to consider such petition on merits. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ The petitioner's premature released request under Article 161 of the Constitution has been considered and recommended by the Tamil Nadu State Council of Ministers and it is also pending before the Government.
While so, the petitioner has completed his Post Graduate in M.A. under the Manonmaniyam Sundaranar Open University in the year 2004 and he has also completed Certificate Course in Computing in 2002 and Certificate Course in Food and Nutrition in 2001 under Indira Gandhi National Open University.
The petitioner having completed the P.G. Degree was eligible for 'A' class facility, thereby, the petitioner had sent a representation dated 21.10.2020 to the 1st respondent through the Superintendent of Central Prison-I, Puzhal, Chennai u/s.227 of Tamil Nadu Prisoners Manual 1983, to treat him as 'A class' Prisoner. Since the said representation has not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

5.Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 21.10.2020 has already been forwarded to the Government. However, they are awaiting for the report from the District Collector to proceed further and because of the Elections, there had been some delay in obtaining the report.

6.At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has completed Post Graduation and as per Rule 225 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual, 1983 he is otherwise entitled for 'A' class facility in view his educational qualification. He would further submit that the petitioner has become old and due to COVID pandemic situation his health condition is also deteriorating and only on account of the delay in getting the report the representation is not considered and thereby he would seek for a direction to the authorities to tentatively consider him as a 'A' class prisoner till his representation dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 21.10.2020 is considered by the Government. He would further submit that this Court in several other cases had directed the authorities to tentatively consider the prisoners as “A” class prisoner in view of Rule No.226 of Tamil Nadu Prison Manual, 1983 pending orders from the Government.

7.Heard the counsels. Perused the materials on record.

8.The representation dated 21.10.2020 seeking to provide 'A' class facility to the petitioner is pending. The petitioner having completed his P.G. Degree is eligible for A class facility as per Rule No.226(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual, 1983.

9.In view of the fact that the representation of the petitioner is pending from 21.10.2020, this Court is inclined to issue a direction to the 3rd respondent herein to treat the petitioner as a 'A' class prisoner tentatively until the representation of the petitioner dated 21.10.2020 is considered by the Government.