S.Palavesathammal v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.03.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.DHANABAL H.C.P.(MD)No.168 of 2026 S.Palavesathammal .. Petitioner / mother of the detenu Vs.
1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, 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 Superintendent of Prison, District Jail, Peravurani, Thoothukudi District.
.. Respondents
Prayer :Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records connectd with the detention order passed in H.S(M) Confdl No.108/2025, dated 26.09.2025 on the file of the second respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenue or body of the detenu namely the petitioner's son I.e., Andiya @ Andikumar, aged about 24 years, S/o.Sankarasubbu, now detained at the District Jail, Perurani, Thoothukudi District, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prithiviraj For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.) The petitioner is the mother of the detenu, by name, Andiya @ Andikumar, S/o.Sankarasubbu, aged about 24 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in H.S(M) Confdl No. 108/2025, dated 26.09.2025, 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. Apart from the other grounds raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, one of the main ground that was raised is that there is a delay of 27 days in passing the detention order and this delay is totally unexplained.
4. In our considered view, the issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura and Others reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1333.
5. The detention order is vitiated due to the fact that there was a solitary case and the live and proximate link between the grounds of detention and the purpose of the detention is completely absent. Hence, this Court is inclined to interfere with the detained order passed by the second respondent.
6. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in H.S(M) Confdl No.108/2025, dated 26.09.2025, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Andiya @ Andikumar, S/o.Sankarasubbu, aged about 24 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. (N.A.V.,J..) (P.D.B.,J.,) 17.03.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Indu
To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, 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 Superintendent of Prison, District Jail, Peravurani, Thoothukudi District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.
AND P.DHANABAL,J.
Indu H.C.P.(MD)No.168 of 2026 17.03.2026