M. SUNDAR, N. ANAND VENKATESH
Muthulakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to the Government Home, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call for the entire records, relating to the petitioner''s husband detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 27.06.2022 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceedings Memo Cr.M.P.No.19/D.O/2022/E1, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner''s husband namely DASS @ MARIYASUSAI, S/o.Samuvel, aged 50 years before this Court and set the petitioner''s husband at liberty from detention, now the petitioner''s husband detained at Central Prison, Coimbatore.)
N. Anand Venkatesh, J.,
1. Captioned ''Habeas Corpus Petition'' [''HCP'' for the sake of brevity] has been filed by wife of detenu assailing a ''preventive detention order dated 27.06.2022 bearing reference Cr.M.P.No.19/D.O/2022/E1'' [hereinafter ''impugned detention order'' for the sake of convenience and brevity]. To be noted, fifth respondent is the sponsoring authority and second respondent is the detaining authority as impugned detention order has been made by second respondent.
2. Impugned detention order
The main legal point established in the judgment is that reliance on an illegible document for passing a detention order deprives the detenu of an opportunity to make an effective representation, lea....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of upholding the detenu's right to make an effective representation as a Constitutional safeguard ingrained in Clause (5) of Arti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the Detaining Authority to properly apply its mind in making a preventive detention order and the recognition that preventive d....
Unexplained delay in establishing the live and proximate link between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention can lead to the invalidation of a preventive detention order.
The impairment of the detenu's right to make an effective representation against a preventive detention order constitutes a violation of the detenu's constitutional safeguard enshrined in Clause (5) ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the incomplete furnishing of crucial documents to the detenu impairs the detenu's right to make an effective representation, rendering the det....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the violation of the detenu's right to make an effective representation, which is a Constitutional safeguard ingrained in Clause (5) of Article ....
The delay in considering the representation can vitiate a preventive detention order, and must be decided qualitatively based on the facts and circumstances of each case.
The incomplete translation of critical documents leading to the impairment of a detainee's constitutional safeguard can result in the dislodgment of a detention order.
The impairment of the detenu's right to make an effective representation against a preventive detention order is a violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and can lead to the setting ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.