Jegan Raj v. State Of Tamil Nadu,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA H.C.P.NO.802 OF 2021 Jegan Raj ... Petitioner/ Brother of the Detenue .Vs.
1.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.
The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai City, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.
3.
The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066.
4.
The Inspector of Police, S-7, Madipakkam Police Station, Chennai.
... Respondents PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS calling for the records relating to the detention order in Memo No.BCDFGISSSV No.105/2021 dated 09.04.2021 passed by the second respondent under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the petitioner's brother Dinesh @ Guru, S/o.Murugan, aged about 28 years, the detenu, now confined in the Central prison, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and set him at liberty.
For petitioner :
Mr.K.Bommuraj For respondents :
Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.] The petitioner is the brother of the detenu viz., Dinesh @ Guru, S/o. Murugan, aged about 28 years. The detenu has been detained by the 2nd respondent by his order dated 09.04.2021 in BCDFGISSSV No.105/2021, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.
3. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the order of detention, he has mainly focused his argument on the ground that the arrest intimation has not been properly translated in vernacular language. This deprived the detenu from making effective representation. Therefore, on this sole ground, the detention order is liable to be quashed.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed his counter affidavit and strongly opposed the Habeas Corpus Petition.
5. On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record especially Page Nos.245 and 246 of the booklet, it is clear that the arrest intimation has not been properly translated in vernacular language. Thus, the impugned detention order is liable to be set aside on this ground.
In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in BCDFGISSSV No.105/2021, dated 09.04.2021,
passed by the 2nd respondent is set aside. The detenu viz., Dinesh @ Guru, S/o.Murugan, aged about 28 years, is directed to be released forthwith, unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar gya To 1.
The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.
The Joint Secretary to Government, Public, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
3.
The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai City, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.
4.
The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai 600 - 066.
5.
The Inspector of Police, S-7, Madipakkam Police Station, Chennai.
6.
The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
H.C.P.NO.802 OF 2021 GJ(CO) PBS/16/11/2021