Lakshmi v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.04.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN H.C.P.NO.1996 OF 2021 Lakshmi .. Petitioner Vs.

1. State of Tamil Nadu represented by The Secretary to Government [Home], Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District.

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison Coimbatore, Coimbatore.

4. The Inspector of Police, No.15, Velampalayam Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur.

.. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the entire records of the 2nd respondent in his proceedings C.No.46/G/IS/Tiruppur City/2021 dated 12.10.2021 to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce the petitioner's son Icourt Maharaja, aged 19 years, S/o.Murugan, before this Court, now confined in the Central Prison, Coimbatore, set him at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Chinnaraj For Respondents : Mr.M.Babu Muthumeeran Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

[Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.] The petitioner is the mother of the detenu Icourt Maharaja, aged 19 years, S/o.Murugan. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in C.No.46/G/IS/Tiruppur City/2021 dated 12.10.2021, 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 remand order has not been properly 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.

On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record especially Page Nos.96 and 97 of the booklet, it is clear that the remand 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.46/G/IS/Tiruppur City/2021 dated 12.10.2021, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Icourt Maharaja, aged 19 years, S/o.Murugan, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

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

To

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

2. The Commissioner of Police, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District.

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison Coimbatore, Coimbatore.

4. The Inspector of Police, No.15, Velampalayam Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur.

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.1996 of 2021 PA(CO) RLP(02/05/2022)