Kasaragod: The Kerala High Court has dismissed a contempt petition filed by the mothers of two convicts in the Periya double murder case, alleging that prison authorities denied their sons ordinary leave despite a March judgment lifting restrictions that prevented them from going home.

The court accepted the prison department's explanation that the leave of Gijin G and Subeesh had been temporarily kept in abeyance because of a deteriorating law-and-order situation in Periya, where the release of other convicts had “triggered political tension and mobilisation by rival groups”. The authorities also cited concerns over the prisoners' safety and the maintenance of public peace.

But the high court did not rule on whether prison authorities could deny the convicts ordinary leave, to which they are entitled, on law-and-order grounds. Justice G Girish said that question could not be decided in a contempt proceeding. “If the case of the petitioners is that the denial of ordinary leave to their sons was against the relevant provisions of law,” the judge said, “they would have to seek an appropriate legal remedy rather than proceed against the prison authorities for contempt.”

The ruling brings to a close the latest round of a legal battle over the leave of convicts in one of Kerala's most politically sensitive murder cases.

The 10 Periya convicts—all CPM workers—did not get bail during the nearly six years they spent as undertrials following the February 2019 murders of Youth Congress workers Kripesh and Sarath Lal. After their conviction by the special CBI court in January 2025, their families approached the High Court seeking ordinary leave.

In September 2025, Justice P V Kunhikrishnan directed the Director General of Prison to take a call on the applications for 30 days of ordinary leave filed by five convicts, including Gijin and A Peethambaran, a former CPM local committee member. Justice Kunhikrishnan said such an application could not be kept pending indefinitely if the prisoners were otherwise eligible.

The Director General subsequently issued ordinary leave orders for Gijin, Peethambaran and Subeesh, but imposed restrictions. They were prohibited from entering Bekal police station limits, where their permanent residences are located. Subeesh's order also said that no co-convict in the case could remain out on leave while he was on leave.

The mothers challenged the restrictions. On March 13, 2026, Justice K Babu held them unsustainable and quashed them, directing the authorities to release Gijin, Peethambaran and Subeesh under the existing leave orders if they complied with the remaining conditions.

The latest contempt petition arose from what happened next. The mothers alleged that prison authorities deliberately denied subsequent ordinary leave to Gijin and Subeesh despite the March judgment. The Prison DG, S Sreejith, and Kannur Central Prison Superintendent K Venu denied that they had revived the quashed restrictions.

Sreejith told the court that the leave had instead been temporarily deferred based on a report from the Kasaragod District Police Chief, warning of serious political tension and mobilisation of rival groups following the release of some Periya convicts. The report also raised concerns over the prisoners' safety and public peace. Justice Girish accepted that distinction and found no wilful disobedience of the March judgment.

The mothers had argued that the police and other law-enforcement agencies were duty-bound to maintain public order and protect their sons while they were on leave, and therefore could not cite law-and-order concerns to deny ordinary leave.

Justice Girish did not examine that question. The contempt proceedings were concerned only with whether the March 13 judgment had been wilfully violated. Whether the denial of ordinary leave itself was contrary to law, he said, would have to be challenged through an appropriate legal remedy.

Why ‘parole’ became a political flashpoint
The case has also been caught in a recurring dispute over the use of the word “parole”. Prison officials have consistently said the Periya convicts were being released on ordinary leave, a facility available under prison rules to eligible prisoners with satisfactory conduct. Prisoners can avail themselves of up to 60 days of ordinary leave a year, either in two spells or in four 15-day spells, roughly one every 2.5 months. Most prisoners prefer the latter option, allowing them to maintain regular contact with their families and society. They can also seek emergency leave in the event of a death, serious illness or marriage in the family.

Yet the leave became politically contentious in May, after the LDF government was voted out and the UDF came to power. Some of the Periya convicts returned to Kalliyot on ordinary leave, prompting political criticism and media reports describing the releases as “parole”, implying that they were a government favour.

The families of Kripesh and Sarath Lal met Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala and complained that the frequent release of the convicts was creating tension and law-and-order concerns in Periya. Chennithala sought a report through the Home Secretary, following which the Kasaragod District Police Chief reported serious political tension and mobilisation of rival groups.

It was against this backdrop that the Prison DG deferred the subsequent ordinary leave of Gijin and Subeesh.