The importance of providing documents in a language understood by the detenu as established in the Pownammal case law.

JUDGMENT

(Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent herein in his proceedings under D.O.No.C2/56/2022 dated 26.09.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce her son by name Ibrahim, male, aged 26 years, son of Jaffar Ali confined in Central Prison, Cuddalore before this Court and set him at liberty.)

M. Sundar, J.

Captioned ''Habeas Corpus Petition'' [''HCP'' for the sake of brevity] has been filed by the mother of detenu assailing a ''preventive detention order dated 26.09.2022 bearing reference D.O.No.C2/56/2022'' [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 the impugned detention order has been made by second respondent.

2. Impugned detention order has been made under ''The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber law offenders, Drug-offenders, Forest-offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic offenders, Sand-offenders, Sexual-offenders, Slum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act No.14 of 1982)'' [hereinafter ''Act 14 of 1982'' for the sake of convenience and clarity] on the premise that the detenu is a ''Goonda'' within the meaning of Section 2(f) of Act 14 of 1982.

3. There is no adverse case. This solitary case which is the sole substratum of the impugned detention order is Crime No.236 of 2022 on the file of Chinnasalem Police Station for an alleged offence under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 332, 336, 353, 435, 436, 379 and 506(ii) of ''The Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)'' [hereinafter ''IPC'' for the sake of convenience and clarity] read with Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992. Owing to the nature of the challenge to the impugned detention order, it is not necessary to delve into the factual matrix or be detained further by facts.

4. Mr.T.Sivagnanasambandan, learned counsel on record for petitioner and Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor, assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John, learned counsel for all respondents are before us.

5. Notwithstanding very many averments and grounds raised in the support affidavit, in the hearing Mr.T.Sivagnanasambandan, learned counsel for petitioner predicated his campaign against the impugned detention order on three points and they are as follows:

a) As regards the subjective satisfaction of detaining authority qua imminent possibility of detenu being enlarged on bail qua paragraph 5 of the impugned detention order, the detaining authority has said that the Sponsoring Authority received reliable information that his relatives are taking steps to file bail application but there is no statement from the relatives. To put it differently, there is nothing to buttress what has been described as ''reliable information'';

b) As regards the same subjective satisfaction, Sponsoring Authority has relied on an order dated 23.03.2023 made in C.M.P.No.2447 of 2020 on the file of the Sessions Court, Villupuram vide Crime No.144 of 2020 for alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 448, 323, 324, 506(ii) IPC read with Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss ) Act of Ulundurpet Police Station but this really is not a similar case as the ground case turns on offences under Sections 379, 436, 435, 353, 336 and 332 of IPC also;

c) The aforementioned order of the Sessions Court has been given in the grounds booklet as an annexure. It is at page 79, it is in English but a Tamil translation has not been provided. Learned counsel submitted that detenu has difficulty in understanding legal language in which the bail order is couched and therefore it has impaired his constitutional safeguard to make an effective representation against the impugned preventive de