Rajendran v. The State Fo Tn Rep By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.01.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN H.C.P.No.3250 of 2024 Rajendran ... Petitioner/Father of the detenu Vs.
1.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department (Home), Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
The District Collector and District Magistrate, Thiruvarur District, Thiruvarur.
The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvarur District, Thiruvarur.
The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Thiruchirapalli.
5.
The Inspector of Police, Kalappal Police Station, Thiruvarur District.
... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records pertaining to the detention order dated 28.09.2024 in C.O.C.No.32/2024 passed by the 2nd respondent and issue a direction to produce the body of the detenu named Raghul, aged 25 years, presently confined at Central Prison, Thiruchirapalli before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.Swamisubramanian For Respondents : Mr. R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) The writ of habeas corpus has been filed challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent in proceedings C.O.C.No.32/2024 dated 28.09.2024.
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents. One adverse case has been relied on for the purpose of invoking Act 14 of 1982. The facts of the ground case reveals that personal
dispute existed between the complainant and the detenu regarding the murder occurred in the year 2013. Thus, the said case cannot be a ground for forming an opinion that there is a likelihood of causing breach of public order. Regarding the adverse case is concerned, it is also under investigation. Therefore, the Police Authorities are expected to expedite the investigation and proceed with the case by following due procedures and the preventive detention in the present case is unnecessary. Accordingly, the detention order passed by the second respondent in proceedings C.O.C.No.32/2024 dated 28.09.2024 is quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu, viz.,Raghul, aged 25/2024, S/o. Rajendran confined at Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless he is required in connection with any other case.
[S.M.S., J.] [M.J.R., J.] 27.01.2025 Index :
Yes/No Speaking Order :
Yes/No :
Yes/No veda
To 1.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department (Home), Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 9.
The District Collector and District Magistrate, Thiruvarur District, Thiruvarur.
The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvarur District, Thiruvarur.
5.
The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Thiruchirapalli.
6.
The Inspector of Police, Kalappal Police Station, Thiruvarur District.
7.
The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai - 104.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
veda H.C.P.No.3250 of 2024 27.01.2025