S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, V. SIVAGNANAM
Moorthy – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department – Respondent
ORDER :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records, relating to the petitioner's son detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order, dated 02.05.2024 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceedings Memo C.M.P.No.17/Bootlegger/2024 [M1], quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner's son namely Prakash, S/o. Moorthy, aged 33 years before this Hon'ble Court and set the petitioner's Son at liberty from detention, now the petitioner's Son detained at Central Prison, Salem.
The order of detention passed by the District Magistrate/District Collector, Namakkal in proceedings No.C.M.P.No.17/Bootlegger/2024 [M1] dated 02.05.2024 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 in preventive detention cases. The detention power conferre
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 adherence in preventive detention is crucial; delays infringe on personal liberty under Article 21.
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 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 adherence in preventive detention is crucial; delays infringe on personal liberty and can invalidate detention orders.
Timely consideration of representations in preventive detention is crucial to uphold individual liberties and prevent arbitrary state action.
Procedural safeguards in preventive detention are crucial to protect individual liberties, and any delay in considering representations can invalidate detention orders.
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.