Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 62044
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.S. RAMESH, V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, JJ
Chithra – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to the Government, Home Prohibition and Excise Dept., Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. – Respondent
H.C.P.No.923 of 2025
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.D.Balaji
For the Respondents: Mr.E.Raj Thilak, Additional Public Prosecutor.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.D.Balaji
For the Respondents: Mr.E.Raj Thilak, Additional Public Prosecutor.
The court held that a Habeas Corpus Petition becomes infructuous upon revocation of the detention order.
Headnote:In this case, pertaining to H.C.P.No.923 of 2025, the court analyzed the government's authority under Article 226 of the Constitution of India regarding detentions. The petitioner challenged the detention order for her husband, contending it violated constitutional provisions. The court found the submission indicating the detention order's revocation, thereby dismissing the petition as infructuous. The court framed the issues as revolving around the legality of detention orders under the Constitution and affirmed the government's action of revocation. Resultantly, the Habeas Corpus Petition was dismissed as infructuous.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. government order led to the revocation of the detention order. (Para 1) |
| 2. court dismissed the petition as infructuous. (Para 2) |
and V . LAKSHMINARAYANAN , J.
When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents, by producing a copy of the Government Order in G.O.Rt.No.3546, Home, Prohibition and Excise (XI) Department, dated 18.06.2025, submitted that the detention order has already been revoked.
2. Recording the said submission, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands dismissed as infructuous.
