Nisha v. The Secretary To The Governement

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 04.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH AND THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN Nisha .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai 600 009 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai 3.The Superintendent of Police Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai 4.The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison, Vellore 5.The Inspector of Police Tiruvannamalai Town Police Station Tiruvannamalai .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS to call for the records in connection with the order 1/4

of detention passed by the 2nd respondent dated 27.04.2022 in D.O.No.48/2022-C2 against the petitioner Vicky @ Vignesh, male, aged 22 years, S/o.Jaishankar who is confined at Central Prison, Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before the Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr.Mohammed Saifulla for Mr.D.Balaji For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

[Made by RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.] The petitioner is the sister of the detenu. The detenu viz., Vicky @ Vignesh, aged 22 years, S/o.Jaishankar has been detained by the 2nd respondent, by his order dated 27.04.2022 in D.O.No.48/2022-C2, 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 and we have also perused the records carefully.

3. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other 2/4

grounds to assail the order of detention, he has mainly focused his argument on the ground that the remand extension order 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. On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record, especially page No.113 of the booklet, it is clear that the remand extension order 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 D.O.No.48/2022-C2 dated 27.04.2022, passed by the 2nd respondent is set aside. The detenu viz., Vicky @ Vignesh, aged 22 years, S/o.Jaishankar, is directed to be released forthwith, unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

[P.N.P., J.] [T K R, J.] gya 04.11.2022 Issue order copy by 07.11.2022 P.N.PRAKASH, J.

AND 3/4

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

gya To 1.The Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai 600 009 2.The Joint Secretary to Government Public, Law and Order Department Secretariat, Chennai-9 3.The District Collector and District Magistrate Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai 4.The Superintendent of Police Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai 5.The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison, Vellore 6.The Inspector of Police Tiruvannamalai Town Police Station Tiruvannamalai 7.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras 04.11.2022 4/4