Palaniyammal v. The Additional Chief Secretary To Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA Palaniyammal ... Petitioner/ Wife of the Detenu -vsState of Tamilnadu, 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, O/o.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai, 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 records relating to the Impugned Order of Detention made in Detention Order.SR.No.

27/S.O/2024 dated 24.12.2024 on the file of the District Collector and District Magistrate, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram, the second respondent herein, branding the detenu by name Manikandan, S/o.Chinnasamy, aged about 34 years as 'Sexual Offender' who is now confined in Central Prison, Madurai, Madurai District and quash the impugned order of detention and set him at liberty by producing him before this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Prakash 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 wife of the detenu viz., Manikandan, son of Chinnasamy, aged about 34 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in S.R.No.27/S.O./2024, dated 24.12.2024 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 petitioner raised the grounds that there was an unexplained delay while detaining the detenu under Act 14 of 1982. The detenu was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.11.2025 in pursuant to the registration of the FIR in Cr.No.23 of 2024 for offences under Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) r/w 6(1) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 & 351 (2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and within a period of 25 days from the date of arrest, the detention order was passed and as such, there is no delay in passing the detention order. The arrest intimation copy was served even by the Magistrate to the relatives of the detenu. That apart, it would not cause any prejudice to the detenu or his relatives to submit an effective representation. Therefore, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the order of detention passed by the second respondent and there is no illegality or irregularity in the detention order and it is liable to be set aside.

4. Accordingly, this habeas corpus petition is dismissed. [G.K.I., J.] [R.P., J.] 10.12.2025 am NCC :Yes/No Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, O/o.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

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

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

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.

AND R. POORNIMA,J.

am 10.12.2025