Madurai: The Madras High Court has rejected a woman's plea seeking ordinary leave for her life-convict husband to beget a child, emphasizing that the welfare of the unborn child must be prioritized. The court noted that the child would grow up bearing the stigma of being born to a convict of a heinous crime.
Court's Observations on Child's Welfare
A division bench comprising Justice N Anand Venkatesh and Justice K K Ramakrishnan observed on Wednesday, "The child, when it enters this world, will grow up with a stigma that it is the child of a life convict, who is serving sentence for having committed a heinous crime involving triple murder." The judges further stated, "The court cannot merely act upon the right that is claimed by the petitioner and ignore the interest of the child, which will carry such a stigma throughout its life. The court cannot turn a blind eye to this reality and, therefore, while balancing the right of the petitioner and the child, the court is more concerned about the welfare of the child, to be born in this world and which will face the consequences psychologically exerted by the society for the heinous acts committed by the convict."
Reformation Theory and Convict's Desire
The bench remarked that the theory of reformation focuses on the convict and has no bearing on the desire to have a child. "Neither the petitioner nor the convict will have the right to place the child in such an unfortunate position right through its life," the judges observed while dismissing the petition.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Jalani, seeking ordinary leave for her husband, I Muthumani, one of 26 convicts serving life imprisonment for the murder of three individuals from the scheduled caste community at Kachanatham village in Sivaganga district in 2018. In 2022, a special court under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act convicted and sentenced him to life imprisonment, which was upheld by the high court in February 2026. No appeal has been filed before the Supreme Court.
Petitioner's Argument and State's Response
The petitioner had approached prison authorities for ordinary leave, citing her desire to conceive a child through her husband, but was rejected due to life threat concerns. She then moved the court challenging the rejection. The state government argued that leave under the Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982, is a privilege, not a right, and cannot be claimed as a matter of right.
The court's decision underscores the importance of considering the child's psychological and social well-being over the personal desires of the convict and petitioner.
