Arun v. The Secretary To Government
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.11.2022 Coram The Honourable Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH and The Honourable Mr. Justice RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN Arun .. Petitioner Vs 1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police /Detaining Authority, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison - Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.
4.State represented by The Inspector of Police, Nallur Police Station, Tiruppur District.
.. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records relating to the petitioner's detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 29.04.2022 on the file of second respondent herein made in proceedings C.No.33/D.O./IS/Tiruppur City/2022 quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner viz.
Arun, S/o.Tamilselvan, aged 25 years, before this Court and set the petitioner at liberty from detention.
For Petitioner : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Addl. Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.) The petitioner is the detenu Arun, S/o.Tamilselvan, aged 25 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in C.No.33/D.O./IS/Tiruppur City/2022 dated 29.04.2022, 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 remand extension order has not been properly 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.
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 No.38 of the booklet, it is clear that the remand extension order has not been properly 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.No.33/D.O./IS/Tiruppur City/2022 dated 29.04.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Arun, S/o.Tamilselvan, aged 25 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
(P.N.P., J.) (TKRJ) 08.11.2022 Index: Yes/No nsd
To 1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police /Detaining Authority, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison - Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Nallur Police Station, Tiruppur District.
5.The Joint Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.
6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
P.N.PRAKASH, J.
and RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
nsd 08.11.2022