Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, G.ARUL MURUGAN, JJ
Mirthunaj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. discussion on the maintainability of the habeas corpus petition. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the petitioner's argument on the grounds of personal liberty. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. evaluation of opposing views on the second habeas corpus petition. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 4. clarification on the application of res judicata in illegal detention cases. (Para 9 , 11 , 15) |
| 5. conclusion of the court dismissing the second petition. (Para 18 , 19) |
ORDER
2.The petitioner has not preferred any Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, instead chosen to prefer a second Habeas Corpus Petition in HCP(MD)No.718 of 2025 challenging the very same detention order dated 04.09.2024, which was under challenge in H.C.P(MD)No.1399 of 2024.
4.In support of the said contention, he relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Lallubhai Jogibhai Patel vs. Union of India and others [1981 SCC (Crl) 463]. In paragraphs 13 and 14, the Apex Court made the following observations:
14.In the present petition fresh additional grounds have been taken, to challenge the legality of the continued detention of the detenu. We would therefore hold that the subsequent writ petition is not
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
