M. SUNDAR, R. SAKTHIVEL
Nandini – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its 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 entire records relating to the petitioner''s husband''s detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 03.03.2023 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceedings No.58/BCDFGISSSV/2023, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner''s husband namely Manikandan, aged 25 years, son of Palani, before this Court and set him at liberty, now the petitioner''s husband is detained at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 66.)
M. Sundar, J.
1. When the captioned ''Habeas Corpus Petition'' (hereinafter ''HCP'' for the sake of convenience and clarity) was listed in the Admission Board on 28.04.2023, the following order was made:
'' H.C.P.No.703 of 2023
M.SUNDAR, J.,
and
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.,
(Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,)
Captioned Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed in this Court on 24.04.2023 inter alia assailing a detention order dated 03.03.2023 bearing reference No.58/BCDFGISSSV/2023 made by ''second respondent'' [hereinafter ''Detaining
The right to make an effective representation against a preventive detention order must not be impaired, and failure to provide translated documents in a language known to the detenu can vitiate the ....
The constitutional safeguard ingrained in Article 22(5) of the Constitution ensures the detenu's right to make an effective representation, and any infraction of such a safeguard vitiates the impugne....
Failure to supply a crucial document in a language known to the detenu impairs the detenu's constitutional right to make an effective representation, rendering the detention illegal.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of providing documents in a language known to the detenu to ensure their constitutional right to make an effective representation....
Failure to furnish crucial documents in a language known to the detenu impairs the detenu's constitutional right to make an effective representation, rendering the continued detention illegal.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of providing translated copies in a language the detenu is conversant with, as mandated by Article 22(5) of the Constitution of I....
Failure to provide a translated copy of a crucial document in a language known to the detenu impaired his constitutional right to make an effective representation, rendering the detention illegal.
Failure to provide a translated copy of a crucial document in a language known to the detenu impairs the detenu's constitutional right to make an effective representation, rendering the detention ill....
Failure to provide a crucial document in the language known to the detenu rendered the impugned detention order illegal, leading to its setting aside.
The infraction of the detenu's right to make an effective representation against a preventive detention order vitiates the order, rendering it liable for dislodgement in a habeas legal drill.
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.