Velankanni v. Additional Chief Secretary To 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.1100 of 2022 Velankanni W/o.Mahendiran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate of Thirupathur District, Thirupathur.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Thirupathur District.

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

5.The Inspector of Police, Vaniyampadi Town Police Station, Thirupathur District.

... 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 detention order passed by the second respondent pertaining to the order made in C3/D.O.No.18/2022 dated 05.04.2022 in detaining the detenu under 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as a Goonda and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu Ragulsubash S/o.Mahendiran, aged about 23 years, who is detained at Central Prison, Vellore, before this Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.Nirmal Krishnan For Respondents :

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

O R D E R

[Made by RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.] The petitioner is the mother of the detenu, Ragulsubash S/o.Mahendiran, aged about 23 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in C3/D.O.No.18/2022 dated 05.04.2022, 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 pertaining to the ground case has not been fully 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.167 and 168 of the booklet, it is clear that the arrest intimation pertaining to the ground case has not been fully 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 C3/D.O.No.18/2022 dated 05.04.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Ragulsubash S/o.Mahendiran, aged about 23 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 Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate of Thirupathur District, Thirupathur.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Thirupathur District.

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

5.The Inspector of Police, Vaniyampadi Town Police Station, Thirupathur District.

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.1100 of 2022 07.11.2022 6/6