Syed Hussain v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

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.947 of 2022 Syed Hussain S/o.Syed Imtiaz ... Petitioner Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, E.V.R. Periyar Salai, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Puzhal.

4.The Inspector of Police, F-4 Thousand Light Police Station, Chennai.

... Respondents 1/6

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records relating to the impugned order No.56/BCDFGISSSV/2022 dated 08.04.2022 on the file of the second respondent herein and set aside the same as illegal and direct the respondents to produce, namely, Syed Hussain S/o.Syed Imtiaz, aged about 31 years, now confined at Central Prison II, Puzhal, before this Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner :

Mrs.R.Subadradevi For Respondents :

Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor *****

O R D E R

[Made by RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.] The petitioner/detenu, Syed Hussain S/o.Syed Imtiaz, aged about 31 years, has been detained by the second respondent by his order in 56/BCDFGISSSV/2022 dated 08.04.2022, 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 remand order pertaining to the ground case 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.723 and 725 of the booklet, it is clear that the remand order pertaining to the ground case 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 56/BCDFGISSSV/2022 dated 08.04.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Syed Hussain S/o.Syed Imtiaz, aged about 31 years, 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 To 1.The Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, E.V.R. Periyar Salai, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Puzhal.

4.The Inspector of Police, F-4 Thousand Light Police Station, Chennai.

4/6

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

6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5/6

P.N.PRAKASH, J.

and RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

gm H.C.P.No.947 of 2022 07.11.2022 6/6