IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Anita Sumanth, Sunder Mohan, JJ
Thennagam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Tamilnadu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. detenu branded goonda under solitary case. (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioner contests; prosecution defends detention. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. no evidence for bail apprehension. (Para 5) |
| 4. detention quashed; detenu released. (Para 6 , 7) |
We have heard Mr.M.Guruprasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The sister of one Thennarasan, S/o.Ramachandiran, branded as Goonda under Section 2(f) of theTamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982(in short ‘Act’) has challenged the order of detention dated 11.08.2025.
3. The arguments of Mr.M.Guruprasad, learned counsel for the petitioner are that the ground case is the solitary instance as against the detenu and that there are no previous offences. There are other grounds that are also pursued before us, the main one being that there is no bail application filed by the detenu and none contemplated. Hence the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority that the detenu may be enlarged on bail is wholly misplaced.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor supports the order of detention pointing out that the offences charged as again
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.