##PAGE1##

H.C.P.No.2020 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P. VELMURUGAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

H.C.P.No.2020 of 2025

E.Arthi

D/o.Elango

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Additional Chief Secretary to the

Government,

Government of Tamil Nadu,

(Home) Prohibition and Excise Department,

Secretariat, Fort St.George,

Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Commissioner of Police,

Tambaram City,

Office of the Commissioner of Police,

Sholinganallur,

Chennai - 600 119.

3. The Superintendent of Police,

Central Prison,

Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066.

4. The State Rep by.

The Inspector Of Police,

T-18, Thazhambur Police Station.

..Respondent(s)

__________

Page1 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/02/2026 03:21:39 pm )

H.C.P.No.2020 of 2025

Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records

connected with the order of the 2^nd respondent herein in BCDFGISSSV

No.61/2025 dated 27.05.2025 passed against the petitioner’s uncle (Periyappa)

detenu namely B.Sampath, S/o.Bakirisamy, aged about 48 years, who is

confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066 and set aside the same,

consequently, directing the respondents herein to produce the body and person

of the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner(s) : Ms.R.Saritha

For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Muniyapparaj

Additional Public Prosecutor

assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN J.)

The petitioner, who is the niece of the detenu, viz., B.Sampath,

S/o.Bakirisamy, aged about 48 years, who is now confined at Central Prison,

Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066, has come forward with this petition challenging the

detention order passed by the second respondent in BCDFGISSSV No.61/2025

dated 27.05.2025, branding him as "Goonda" 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

__________

Page2 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/02/2026 03:21:39 pm )

H.C.P.No.2020 of 2025

1982] read with the orders issued by the Government in G.O.(D).No.97 Home

Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department dated 11.04.2025 under Sub Section

(2) of Section 3 of the said Act.

2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the

learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have

also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

3. Though very many grounds have been raised in the support affidavit

assailing the detention order, in the hearing, the learned counsel for the

petitioner mainly focused his arguments on two grounds that (i) the Detaining

Authority has not supplied the translated copy of the remand order dated

30.04.2025 (English version) in the language which the detenu is conversant

with, which prevented the detenu from making an effective representation

against the impugned order of detention; and (ii) at the time of passing the

detention order, the detenu has not moved any bail application in respect of the

ground case in Crime No.139 of 2025, however, the detaining authority after

quoting that the detenu has not filed any bail application in the ground case, but

his relatives are taking steps to take him out on bail in the above case and also

by relying on a case registered in Crime No.258 of 2023 on the file of the T-10

Manimangalam Police Station for the offences under Sections 294(b), 341, 392,

397 and 506(ii) IPC, wherein bail has been granted to the accused

__________

Page3 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/02/2026 03:21:39 pm )

H.C.P.No.2020 of 2025

Mohamed Sadham Hussain in Crl.M.P.No.23 of 2024, has come to the

conclusion that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail.

Therefore, on the aforesaid grounds,