Gunasekaran v. The Secretary To The Government

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.01.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH AND THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA H.C.P.NO.983 OF 2021 Gunasekaran .. Petitioner/ Father of the Detenue Vs.

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

2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai.

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 66.

4. The Inspector of Police, L & O, S-10, Pallaikaranai Police Station, Chennai.

.. Respondents Prayer:

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 27.05.2021 in BCDFGISSSV No.145/2021 against the petitioner's son Sathish Kumar @ Sathish, Male, aged 25 years, S/o.Gunasekaran, who is confined at the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthilvel For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

[Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.] The petitioner is the father of the detenu Sathish Kumar @ Sathish, Male, aged 25 years, S/o.Gunasekaran. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in BCDFGISSSV No.145/2021 dated 27.05.2021, 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 fully translated in vernacular language. He further submitted that the detaining authority, while detaining the detenu, has not furnished the legible copies of the documents relied on by him. This deprived the detenu from making effective representation. Therefore, on these grounds, the detention order is liable to be quashed.

4.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the habeas corpus petition by filing his counter. 5.

On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record especially Page Nos.279 to 281 of the booklet, it is clear that the arrest intimation has not been fully 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.145/2021 dated 27.05.2021,

passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Sathish Kumar @ Sathish, Male, aged 25 years, S/o.Gunasekaran, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar nsd To

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

2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai.

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 66.

4. The Inspector of Police, L & O, S-10, Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai.

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

6. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

H.C.P.No.983 of 2021 AK II(CO) PM/19/01/2022