Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.S.Ramesh, N.Senthilkumar
M.Jothi – Appellant
Versus
Government of Tamilnadu, rep, by its The Additional Secretary Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department – Respondent
ORDER :
M.S.RAMESH, N.SENTHILKUMAR , J.
The petitioner herein, who is the sister of the detenu viz. Kanagavel, aged about 40 years, S/o. Seetharaman, has come forward with this petition challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 07.11.2024 slapped on her brother, branding him as "Sexual Offender" 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 14 of 1982].
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
3. Though several grounds are raised in the petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the Accident Register given to the detenu has not been translated in vernacular language. In this circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that serious prejudice has been caused to the petitioner for making effective representation.
4. On a perusal of the Booklet, it is seen that page No.16 is the English version of the Accident Register which has
The failure to provide a translated version of a material document in detention cases violates constitutional rights, rendering the detention order illegal.
Failure to provide translated material documents to a detenu invalidates the detention order, upholding the right to effective representation under Article 22(5).
Failure to provide translated documents to a detenu violates the right to an effective representation, leading to quashing of the detention order.
Improper translation of critical documents in detention proceedings violates the right to effective representation, rendering continued detention illegal.
Non-supply of arrest intimation in detenu's language violates Article 22(5), vitiating preventive detention order.
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) of the Constitution.
Procedural violations in preventive detention, particularly regarding the translation of documents, can render a detention order illegal under Article 22.
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 includes the provision of documents in a language understood by the detenue, as per constitutional safeguards.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
