M. SUNDAR, D. NAGARJUN
Vellaiyammal – Appellant
Versus
State represented by its The Secretary to Government (Home) Prohibition & Excise Department, 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 records pertaining to the order of detention dated 31.08.2022 passed by the 2nd respondent in C.M.P.No.102/Drug Offender/Salem City/2022 and quash the same and produce the detenu Sathish Kumar, S/o.Selvam, aged about 31 years, before this Hon''ble Court and set him at liberty and the detenu now confined in Central Prison, Salem.)
M. Sundar, J.
1. Captioned ''Habeas Corpus Petition'' [''HCP'' for the sake of brevity] has been filed by mother of the detenu assailing a ''preventive detention order dated 31.08.2022 bearing reference C.M.P.No.102/Drug Offender/Salem City/2022'' [hereinafter ''impugned detention order'' for the sake of convenience and brevity]. To be noted, fourth 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, Sandoffenders
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 the requirement for the Detaining Authority to properly apply its mind in making a preventive detention order and the recognition that preventive d....
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 a 'live and proximate link' between the grounds of preventive detention and the purpose of detention, and the unacceptability o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish a 'live and proximate link' between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention, and the unacceptability of ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a 'live and proximate link' between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention in the context of preventive detent....
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 ....
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.
Non-application of mind by the detaining authority in making a preventive detention order under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982.
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....
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.