Justice G.Girish made the observation in a contempt petition filed by mothers of the convicts in the Periya Double Murder Case, involving murder of two Youth Congress activists in Periya in Kasargod District.

The contempt petition was filed alleging that the prison authorities had willfully violated the direction of the High Court in a judgment which lifted two conditions imposed by the prison authorities when the ordinary leave was granted to the convicts.

The conditions imposed were about the restriction of entry of the accused within the limits of Bekal Police Station, and the bar against the release on leave of more than one of the convicts at a time. The High Court had quashed the above conditions and directed the release of the convicts via a judgment dated 13 March 2026 in W.P.(Crl.)No.459/2026.

In the present contempt petition, the mothers of the convicts alleged that the prison authorities denied the subsequent ordinary leaves to their sons, and thus willfully violated the direction of the High Court in a judgment.

The respondents, the Director General or Prisons and Correctional Services, Kerala Prisons and Superintendent Central Prisons and Correction Home, Kannur filed affidavit and submitted that serious issues of law and order violation took place in the locality falling within the jurisdiction of Bekal Police State when the co-convicts of Periya Double Murder case were released on ordinary leave. This prompted the authorities to keep in abeyance the release of the sons of the petitioner on ordinary leave.

It was further submitted that the concerned District Police Chief had reported about serious political tension and mobilisation of rival groups which posed threat to the safety and security of the convicts and the maintenance of public peace and tranquility.

The Court noted that the petitioner has no case that the respondent, Prison authorities, has reimposed the conditions which were quashed earlier. It further noted that the allegation of the petitioners is that the respondents have intentionally denied the subsequent eligible ordinary leave to the sons of the petitioners as an act of vindictiveness.

The Court observed that the decision of respondents to defer the release of the convicts due to law and order issue cannot be considered as willful violation of the previous judgment.

“The decision taken by the respondents to defer the release of the sons of the petitioners on ordinary leave due to the law and order concerns which affected the safety and security of the above prisoners, and also the public tranquility and maintenance of law and order situation cannot be termed as a willful violation of the aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court. Therefore, the question of initiating Contempt of Court proceedings does not arise in the given factual scenario.” Court noted.

With the above observations, the Court dismissed the contempt of Court case.

Case Title: Geetha and Anr. v S. Sreejith IPS and Anr.

Case No: Con. Case(C) 1982/ 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 492

Counsel for Petitioners: K.S. Madhusoodanan, M.M. Vinod Kumar, P.K. Rakesh Kumar, K.S. Mizver

Counsel for Respondent: Sameer. S