Back
M. SUNDAR, R. SAKTHIVEL
Jamshith – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ order or direction in the nature of WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent dated 20.04.2023 in No.104/BCDFGISSSV/2023 against the petitioner''s son Nasarullah, Male aged about 23 years, Son of Sanavullah, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.)
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 20.04.2023 bearing reference No.104/BCDFGISSSV/2023'' [hereinafter ''impugned preventive detention order'' for the sake of convenience and brevity] made by second respondent (hereinafter ''detaining authority'' for the sake of convenience). To be noted, fourth respondent is the sponsoring authority.
2. Impugned preventive detention order has been made under ''The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber law offenders, Drug-offenders, Forest-
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.
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....
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....
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 ....
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 failure to provide a correct translation of crucial documents in a language known to the detenu can impair the detenu's constitutional right to make an effective representation, rendering the det....
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....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to provide the correct translation of crucial documents in the detenu's known language impairs their constitutional right to ma....
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 importance of providing documents in a language understood by the detenu as established in the Pownammal case law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
