S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, V. SIVAGNANAM
Malar – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Secretary to the Government, Home Prohibition and Excise Department – Respondent
ORDER :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records relating to the impugned detention order made in D.O.No.C2/11/2024 dated 23.05.2024 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce the detenue, Kamaraj, S/o.Subramani aged about 45 years now confined at Central Prison Cuddalore before this Court and set him at liberty.
The order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings in D.O.No.C2/11/2024 dated 23.05.2024 is sought to be quashed in the present Habeas Corpus Petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the translation copy of the Government Order has not been furnished to the detenu. The detenu has no knowledge in reading English and non translation of the Government Order caused prejudice to the detenu from submitting effective representation, which is a valuable right under the Act.
3. In this context, it is useful to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Powanammal vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (1999) 2 SCC 413. The Hon'ble Supre
The right to effective representation in detention cases necessitates the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenue.
The court established that the right to effective representation includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenu, as per Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
The court established that the right to effective representation includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenue, as mandated by Article 22(5).
The court established that the right to make an effective representation against detention includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenu.
The court established that the right to effective representation includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenu, reinforcing the safeguards under Article 22(5).
The court established that the right to effective representation in detention cases includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenue.
The court established that the right to effective representation against detention includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenu.
The court established that the right to effective representation in detention cases includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenue.
The court established that the right to effective representation in preventive detention cases includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenue.
The court established that effective representation against detention orders requires documents to be provided in a language understood by the detenu, as mandated by Article 22(5).
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.