S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, V. SIVAGNANAM
Mathiyazhagi – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Chennai – Respondent
ORDER :
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 29.06.2024 in D.O. No. C2/20/2024 against the petitioner husband Annadurai, male aged 46 years S/o. Kasinathan, who is confined at Central Prison, Cuddalore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenue before this Court and set him at liberty.
1. The preventive detention order passed by the second respondent is under challenge in the present Habeas Corpus Petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
3. The Arrest Intimation Form enclosed at page no. 49 of the booklet served on the detenue has not been translated in the language known to the detenue. Therefore, the detenue is deprived from making effective representation and that the Detention Order passed by the Detaining Authority is vitiated. Further, the detenue is studying MCA course, which is also to be taken into consideration.
4. In this context, it is useful to refer to the judgment of the Hon'
The court established that effective representation rights under Article 22(5) require documents to be provided in a language understood by the detenu.
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 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).
The right to effective representation in preventive detention cases necessitates that all relevant documents be provided 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 effective communication of detention orders in a language understood by the detenu is essential for lawful preventive detention.
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 effective representation requires documents to be provided in a language understood by the detenue, 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.