K.Jeya v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.11.2022 Coram The Honourable Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH and The Honourable Mr. Justice RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN K.Jeya .. Petitioner Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Fort St. George Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Magistrate & District Collector Namakkal District, Namakkal 3.The Inspector of Police Nallipalayam Police Station, Namakkal District 4.The Superintendent Central Prison, Salem .. Respondents 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 2nd respondent on 22.04.2022 in C.M.P.No.11/DRUG OFFENDER/2022 [M1] and to quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body of the detenu P.Kumar, S/o.Paulsamy, aged about 40 years, before this Court and set him at liberty, now detained at Central Prison, Salem.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Iyyapparaj For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.) The petitioner is the wife of the detenu viz., Kumar, aged about 40 years, S/o.Paulsamy. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in C.M.P.N0.11/DRUG OFFENDER/2022 [M1] dated 22.04.2022, holding him to be a "DRUG OFFENDER", as contemplated under Section 2(e) 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. This deprived the

detenu from making effective representation. Therefore, on this 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 Nos.16 and 18 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 C.M.P.No.11/DRUG OFFENDER/2022 [M1] dated 22.04.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Kumar, aged about 40 years, S/o.Paulsamy, 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.) 02.11.2022 nsd

P.N.PRAKASH, J.

and RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

nsd To 1.The Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Fort St. George Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Magistrate & District Collector Namakkal District, Namakkal 3.The Inspector of Police Nallipalayam Police Station Namakkal District 4.The Superintendent Central Prison, Salem 5.The Joint Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Public, Law and Order Department Secretariat, Chennai - 9 6.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras 02.11.2022