Sumathi @ Rakku v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.02.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA Sumathi @ Rakku ... Petitioner -vs1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Madurai District
3. The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison Madurai District ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records connected with the detention order of the second
respondent in BCDFGISSSV No.59 of 2025 dated 29.07.2025 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu by name Deepanraj, son of Arumugam, aged about 25 years now detained as "Sexual offender" at Madurai Central Prison before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith For Petitioner :
Dr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.) The petitioner is the mother detenu viz., Deepanraj, son of Arumugam, aged about 25 years . The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in detention order in BCDFGISSSV No.59 of 2025 dated 29.07.2025 holding him to be a "sexual offender", as contemplated under Section 2(ggg) 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 raised ground that the representation dated 13.08.2025 was not disposed of within a reasonable time. Further the detenu was served with illegible copy of the accident register which is annexed at page no. 65 of the booklet. Further similarly placed accused person was released on bail and as such the detaining authority apprehends that the detenu will also be released on bail and passed the detention order. Further the similarly placed accused involved in 18 cases and as such it cannot be said that the detenu is also a similarly placed accused.
4. A perusal of the record reveals that though the representation was received on 14.08.2025 itself it was rejected only on 20.08.2025 and as such there was no delay in considering the representation to re-consider the order of detention. Further the accident register in page no.65 of the booklet is illegible but in page no.67 legible copy of the accident register is annexed with a translated version and it was also duly served on the detenu.
5. In view of the same, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the second respondent, hence the petition stands dismissed.
[G.K.I., J.] [R.P., J.] 11.02.2026 NCC :Yes/No Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No aav
To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Madurai District
3. The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison Madurai District 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
AND R. POORNIMA,J.
aav 11.02.2026