Meeradevi v. The State Of Tamilnabu Rep. By
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD)No.214 of 2025 Meeradevi ... Petitioner vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Principal Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai -600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Trichy City.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Trichy.
Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records, relating to the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent in C.No.104/ Detention / CPO/TC/2024, dated 23.10.2024 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu namely Jeyaseelan, S/o. Krishnan aged about 47 years (now detained at Central Prison, Trichy) before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.
Page No.1 of 5
For Petitioner : Mr.D.S. Haroon Rasheed For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.] The petitioner is the wife of the detenu viz., Jeyaseelan, S/o. Krishnan aged about 47 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in C.No.104 / Detention / CPO / TC / 2024, dated 23.10.2024, 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. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the intimation regarding the detenu, the petitioner's husband being detained under preventive detention has been served on him, the detention order does not specify the date from which he has been detained as a "Drug Offender" and thereby, the petitioner was prevented from making an effective representation. Page No.2 of 5
4.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that after satisfying with the materials placed by the Sponsoring Authority, the Detaining Authority has passed the impugned detention order with proper application of mind and there is no illegality or infirmity in the detention order and hence, prayed for dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
5. On perusal of the records, it is evident that the actions of the detaining authority caused prejudice to the petitioner. Therefore, we have no hesitation in quashing the order of detention passed by the said authority. 7.
In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in C.No.104/ Detention/CPO/TC/2024, dated 23.10.2024, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Jeyaseelan, S/o. Krishnan aged about 47 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
[A.D.J.C., J.] [R.P., J.] 17.07.2025 Index : Yes / No : Yes / No trp Page No.3 of 5
To:
1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai -600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Trichy City.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Trichy.
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madars High Court, Madurai.
Page No.4 of 5
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
AND R.POORNIMA, J.
trp ORDER MADE IN DATED : 17.07.2025 Page No.5 of 5