C.Ramasamy v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN C.Ramasamy ... Petitioners Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep By, The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9..

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

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai..

... 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 connected with the detention order passed in Detention Order No.76/2025 dated 17-12-2025 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and quash the same 1/5

and direct the respondents to produce the detenu or body of the detenu, namely, Sivashankar, aged about 20 years, S/o.Ramasamy, now detained at the Central Prison, Madurai, Madurai District before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : M/s.P.Krishnaveni, For Respondents : Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandian, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.) The petitioner is the father of the detenu, by name, Sivashankar, S/o.Ramasamy, aged about 20 years, The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his Detention Order No.76/2025 dated 17-12-2025 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 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

2/5

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 the detenu was arrested on 18.11.2025, whereas, the detention order was passed only on 17.12.2025. There is a delay of nearly 30 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.

3/5

6. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in Detention Order No.76/2025 dated 17-12-2025, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Sivashankar, S/o.Ramasamy, aged about 20 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

(N.A.V.,J..) (K.K.R.K.,J.,) 10.06.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No tta To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9..

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

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai..

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

4/5

N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.

AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.

tta

ORDER

IN HCP(MD) No.529 of 2026 Date : 10/06/2026 5/5