IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ANITA SUMANTH, SUNDER MOHAN
Neelima, W/o.Varaaki – Appellant
Versus
Additional Chief Secretary Home, Prohibition and Excise Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. detention challenged; ground case dubious landlord dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 2. prior orders confirm no detention justification; state adversarial. (Para 4 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 3. inapt bail comparison vitiates subjective satisfaction. (Para 6 , 7 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 4. arrest grounds not timely served violating article 22. (Para 18 , 19 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 5. no public order threat; sexual offence insufficient for detention. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. hcp allowed; detention quashed with costs. (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
ORDER :
ANITA SUMANTH, J.
The wife of one Varaaki S/o. Radhakrishnan (detenu) Central Prison-II, Puzhal, Chennai has approached this Court challenging detention order dated 03.12.2025 passed on the basis that the detenu is a Sexual Offender under Section 2 (ggg) of the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act, 1982 (in short ‘Act’).
2. The submissions of Mr.Arun Anbumani, learned counsel appearing for Mr.P.Rajkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner are that the detention order is bad in law and contrary to the mandate of the Act. It has been passed in excess of jurisdiction conferred on the det
JaseelaShaji v. Union of India
Vaddi Lakshmi v. State of Telangana
MalladaK.Sri Ram v. State of Telangana
A.Kamala v.The State of Tamil Nadu
Commissioner of Police v. C.Anita
Preventive detention invalid without proof of public order threat; arrest grounds must be served timely under Art.22.
Preventive detention orders can be upheld even if there are procedural lapses, such as failure to inform the grounds of arrest, unless it can be demonstrated that such lapses caused the detenu seriou....
The gravity and nature of the act are relevant in determining the necessity of detention under the Acts.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 8(1) of Act 14 of 1982, which mandates the communication of grounds of detention to the detenu within....
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.