M. SUNDAR, R. SAKTHIVEL
A. Ranjitham – Appellant
Versus
State Rep. By the Secretary Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, 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 pursuant to the order in Rc.No.C2/23633/2023, dated 29.03.2023 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently produce the detenu Geja, wife of Boopalan, aged about 47 years before this Court and set her at liberty.)
M. Sundar, J.
1. Captioned ''Habeas Corpus Petition'' [''HCP'' for the sake of brevity] has been filed by sister of the detenue assailing a ''preventive detention order dated 29.03.2023 bearing reference Rc.No.C2/23633/2023'' [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-offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic offenders, Sand-offenders, Sexual-offenders, Slum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act No.14 of 1982)'' [hereinafter ''
The impairment of the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority regarding the detenue's imminent possibility of being enlarged on bail led to the setting aside of the impugned preventive det....
The impaired subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority regarding the detenu's imminent possibility of being enlarged on bail led to the vitiation of the impugned preventive detention order.
The main 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 detention o....
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 comparison of cases with different quantities of narcotics for arriving at subjective satisfaction regarding bail in preventive detention orders is a flawed exercise, especially when there is a s....
The main 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 detention....
The impaired subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority regarding the detenu's imminent possibility of being enlarged on bail led to the setting aside of the impugned preventive detention ord....
The subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority in preventive detention cases must be based on reliable and dated evidence to justify the imminent possibility of the detenu being enlarged on b....
The unexplained delay between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention can render a preventive detention order invalid.
The flawed subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority regarding the possibility of the detenu being enlarged on bail vitiates the preventive detention order.
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.