IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. SUNDAR, R. SAKTHIVEL, JJ.
Priya & Others – Appellants
Versus
The Additional Chief Secretary to Government (Home) Prohibition and Excise Department Government of Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Secretarial Chennai & Others – Respondents
H.C.P. No. 721, 722, 723, 738 & 741 of 2023
Decided On : 08-09-2023
Detention Orders - Habeas Corpus Petitions - 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) - Sections 341, 147, 148, 506(ii), 307, 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860) - The court found that the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the Detaining Authority as regards the imminent possibility of the detenus being enlarged on bail was impaired, and the grounds of the impugned preventive detention orders were found to be non-application of mind. The court held that the impairment of such subjective satisfaction leaves the impugned preventive detention order vitiated and liable for being dislodged in a habeas legal drill. The court also found that the detenus' right to make an effective representation against the impugned preventive detention orders was seriously affected, leading to the dislodgement of the orders.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed Habeas Corpus Petitions challenging detention orders dated 08.04.2023 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The detention orders were made under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982, based on alleged offenses under Sections 341, 147, 148, 506(ii), 307, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the Detaining Authority as regards the imminent possibility of the detenus being enlarged on bail was impaired, and the grounds of the impugned preventive detention orders were found to be non-application of mind. The court held that the impairment of such subjective satisfaction leaves the impugned preventive detention order vitiated and liable for being dislodged in a habeas legal drill. The court also found that the detenus' right to make an effective representation against the impugned preventive detention orders was seriously affected, leading to the dislodgement of the orders.
Issues: The issues revolved around the impairment of subjective satisfaction by the Detaining Authority, non-application of mind in the grounds of the impugned preventive detention orders, and the serious affect on the detenus' right to make an effective representation against the orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The impairment of subjective satisfaction and non-application of mind in the grounds of the impugned preventive detention orders led to the dislodgement of the orders. Additionally, the serious affect on the detenus' right to make an effective representation against the orders further supported the dislodgement of the orders.
Final Decision: The court allowed all the Habeas Corpus Petitions and set aside the impugned preventive detention orders, directing the detenus to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case/cases.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of direction to call for the records pertaining to the order of detention dated 08.04.2023 passed by the second respondent in C.O.C.No.31/2023 and quash the same and produce the detenu Stalin Bharathi, aged about 33 years, son of Natesa Tamilarvan detained at District Jail, Pudukottai before this Court and set him at liberty.
H.C.P.No.722 of 2023: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of direction to call for the records pertaining to the order of detention dated 08.04.2023 passed by the second respondent in C.O.C.No.33/2023 and quash the same and produce the detenu Surya, aged about 25 years, son of Murugesh detained at District Jail, Pudukottai before this Court and set him at liberty.
H.C.P.No.723 of 2023: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of direction to call for the records pertaining to the order of detention dated 08.04.2023 passed by the second respondent in C.O.C.No.35/2023 and quash the same and produce the detenu Arasu, aged about 20 years, son of Anbalagan detained at District Jail, Pudukottai before this Court and set him at liberty.
H.C.P.No.738 of 2023: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of direction to call for the records pertaining to the order of detention dated 08.04.2023 passed by the second respondent in C.O.C.No.34/2023 and quash the same and produce the detenu Madhavan, aged about 21 years, son of Gobu detained at District Jail, Pudukottai before this Court and set him at liberty.
H.C.P.No.741 of 2023: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of direction to call for the records pertaining to the order of detention dated 08.04.2023 passed by the second respondent in C.O.C.No.32/2023 and quash the same and produce the detenu Veerapandiyan, aged about 29 years, son of Sekar detained at District Jail, Pudukottai before this Court and set him at liberty.)
M. Sundar, J.
1. This common order will now dispose of the captioned five ''Habeas Corpus Petitions'' [''HCPs'' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity]. ''H.C.P.No.721 of 2023'', ''H.C.P.No.722 of 2023'', ''H.C.P.No.723 of 2023'', ''H.C.P.No.738 of 2023'' and ''H.C.P.No.741 of 2023'' shall be referred to as ''I HCP'', ''II HCP'', ''III HCP'', ''IV HCP'' and ''V HCP'' respectively for the sake of convenience and clarity wherever necessary.
2. When the captioned HCPs were listed for Admission on 01.06.2023, the following orders were made:
''H.C.P.No.721 of 2023
1.Captioned Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed in this Court on 25.04.2023 inter alia assailing a detention order dated 08.04.2023 bearing reference C.O.C.No.31/2023 made by ''second respondent'' [hereinafter ''Detaining Authority'' for the sake of convenience and clarity]. To be noted, fifth respondent is the Sponsoring Authority.
2. To be noted, Wife of the detenu is the petitioner.
3. Dr.S.Manoharan, learned counsel on record for habeas corpus petitioner is before us. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that ground case qua the detenu is for alleged offences under Sections 341, 147, 148, 506(ii), 307 and 302 of ''Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860)'' [''IPC'' for brevity] and subsequently altered to Sections 120(B), 147, 148, 341, 427, 506(ii), 307 and 302 of IPC in Crime No.81 of 2023 on the file of Koradacherry Police Station.
4. The aforementioned detention order has been made on the premise that the detenu is a ''Goonda'' under Section 2(f) of ''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 P
AI
The impairment of subjective satisfaction and non-application of mind in the grounds of the impugned preventive detention orders led to the dislodgement of the orders, emphasizing the importance of u....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 8(1) of Act 14 of 1982, which mandates the communication of grounds of detention to the detenu within....
Failure to inform detained individuals of their arrest and not supplying documents does not automatically invalidate detention under preventive law unless it hinders effective legal representation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of upholding the detenu's rights, including adequate notice for hearings, provision of necessary legal documents, and consideration ....
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.