S.Rani v. The Additional Chief Secretary To Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.07.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR H.C.P.(MD)No.11 of 2023 S.Rani .. Petitioner/Mother of the Detenu Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records connected with the detention order passed in H.S.(M)Confdl.No.260 of 2022, dated 13.12.2022, on the file of the second respondent herein, quash the same and

direct the respondents to produce the detenu or body of the detenu namely, the petitioner's son i.e., Mugesh @ Panai, aged about 23 years, S/o.Shanmugavel, now detained at the Central Prison, Palayamkottai, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Pragalathan For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.) The petitioner is the mother of the detenu viz., Mugesh @ Panai, aged about 23 years, S/o.Shanmugavel. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in H.S.(M)Confdl.No.260/2022, dated 13.12.2022, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of the 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 copy of the first remand order has not been furnished to the detenu in vernacular language, despite the same has been sought for by the petitioner in her representation. Therefore, on the sole 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, the representation made by the petitioner dated 26.12.2022, she had sought for the first remand order, however, the same has not been furnished to the detenu in vernacular language, which vitiates the order of detention.

5. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in H.S.(M) Confdl.No.260/2022, dated 13.12.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Mugesh @ Panai, aged about 23 years, S/o.Shanmugavel, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. NCC : Yes / No (M.S.R., J.) (M.N.K., J.) Index : Yes / No 25.07.2023 smn2/RR

To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

M.S.RAMESH, J.

and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

smn2/RR H.C.P.(MD)No.11 of 2023 25.07.2023