S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, V. SIVAGNANAM
Suriya – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
ORDER :
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records relating to the petitioner's husband detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 30.06.2024 on the file of the second respondent herein and made in proceedings Cr.M.P.No.30/Bootlegger/2024C1 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner's husband namely Gubendra Prabhu son of Ponnaian aged about 44 years before this Court and set the petitioner's husband at liberty from detention, where the petitioner's husband detained in Central Prison, Coimbatore.
The order of detention passed by the District Magistrate and District Collector, Erode District in proceedings Cr.M.P.No.30/Bootlegger/2024 C1 dated 30.06.2024 is sought to be quashed in the present habeas corpus petition.
2. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would mainly contend that there was a delay in considering the representation submitted by the detenue under Act 14 of 1982.
3. Delay in considering the representation is vital, more specifically
Procedural adherence in preventive detention is crucial; delays infringe on personal liberty under Article 21.
Timely consideration of representations in preventive detention cases is crucial to uphold individual liberties and prevent arbitrary state action.
Procedural adherence in preventive detention is crucial; delays infringe on personal liberty and can invalidate detention orders.
Procedural lapses in preventive detention, such as delays in representation consideration, infringe on personal liberty and invalidate detention orders.
Procedural delays in preventive detention cases infringe on personal liberty rights, necessitating strict adherence to legal protocols.
Procedural safeguards in preventive detention are crucial to protect individual liberties, and any delay in considering representations can invalidate detention orders.
Procedural adherence in preventive detention is crucial; delays infringe on personal liberty and can invalidate detention orders.
The court established that delays in the consideration of representations in preventive detention cases infringe upon the right to personal liberty, necessitating strict compliance with procedural sa....
Timely consideration of representations in preventive detention is crucial to uphold individual liberties and prevent arbitrary state action.
The court established that procedural delays in preventive detention cases violate constitutional rights and must be strictly scrutinized to protect individual liberties.
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.