Sangeetha v. The Additional Chief Secrtary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 18.12.2025 Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN --- Sangeetha W/o.Gajapathivarma .. Petitioner Vs.
1. The Additional Chief Secretary Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009
2. The District Collector and District Magistrate Ranipet District, Ranipet
3. The Superintendent of Central Prison Central Prison-II, Puzhal Chennai - 600 066
4. The Superintendent of Police Ranipet District
5. The Inspector of Police Sholingur Police Station Ranipet .. Respondents Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records relating to the detention order B3/D.O.No.60/2025 dated 15.07.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent and set aside the same and direct the respondent to produce the body of the detenue Gajapathivarma, S/o.Balasubramaniyan, aged 50 years now 1 / 5
detained in Central Prison-II, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and set him liberty forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Kannan For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John
ORDER
(The Order of the Court was made by P.Velmurugan, J) This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the detention order B3/D.O.No.60/2025 dated 15.07.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the body of the detenue, namely Gajapathivarma, S/o.Balasubramaniyan, aged 50 years, now detained in Central PrisonII, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.
2. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner took several grounds to quash the impugned order of detention, he focused mainly on two grounds. One of the grounds is that the arrest intimation was not served on the close relatives/family members of the detenue. The other ground is that the vital documents relied on in the grounds of detention, were not furnished to the detenue.
3. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
4. As far as the contention with regard to non-intimation of arrest is concerned, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that the arrest intimation was duly intimated to the wife of the detenue. The same has also been 2 / 5
mentioned in Paragraph No.7 of the counter affidavit. Therefore, this Court finds that the arrest intimation was duly intimated to the wife of the detenue. Hence, the said ground is not acceptable.
5. As far as the ground of non-furnishing of materials relied on in the detention order is concerned, the respondents have not stated anything about the same in detail in the counter affidavit. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash the detention order passed against the detenue on the ground of non-supply of materials relied on in the impugned detention order.
6. Accordingly, the impugned detention order B3/D.O.No.60/2025 dated 15.07.2025, passed by the 2nd respondent, is hereby quashed on the ground of nonsupply of materials relied on in the detention order and the detenue, namely Gajapathivarma, S/o.Balasubramaniyan, aged 50 years, now detained in Central PrisonII, Puzhal, Chennai, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless he is required in connection with any other case.
7. With the above direction, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. (P.V., J) (M.J.R., J) 18.12.2025 ksa-2 3 / 5
To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009
2. The District Collector and District Magistrate Ranipet District, Ranipet
3. The Superintendent of Central Prison Central Prison-II, Puzhal Chennai - 600 066
4. The Superintendent of Police Ranipet District
5. The Inspector of Police Sholingur Police Station, Ranipet
6. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
4 / 5
P.VELMURUGAN, J and M.JOTHIRAMAN, J ksa-2 18.12.2025 5 / 5