N.Sabira v. The Secretary To The Government

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.11.2022 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN H.C.P.No.788 of 2022 N.Sabira W/o.Munna @ Sayed Muhamed ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate of 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 District.

... Respondents 1/6

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 27.04.2022 in D.O.No.47/2022-C2 against the petitioner's husband Munna @ Sayed Muhamed, male, aged 25 years, S/o.Ramjani, who is confined at the Central Prison, Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Mohamed 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 wife of the detenu Munna @ Sayed Muhamed, male, aged 25 years, S/o.Ramjani, has been detained by the second respondent by his order in D.O.No.47/2022-C2 dated 27.04.2022, 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.

2/6

2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

3. Though 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 these grounds, 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 Nos.25 and 26 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.

3/6

In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in D.O.No.47/2022-C2 dated 27.04.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Munna @ Sayed Muhamed, male, aged 25 years, S/o.Ramjani, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. [PNP, J.] [TKR, J.] 07.11.2022 Index: Yes/No gm 4/6

To 1.The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate of 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 District.

6.The Joint Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

7.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5/6

P.N.PRAKASH, J.

and RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

gm H.C.P.No.788 of 2022 07.11.2022 6/6