IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Anand Venkatesh, K.K. Ramakrishnan, JJ
B.Shanthi – Appellant
Versus
The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department – Respondent
H.C.P.(MD)No.336 of 2026 | Detention Order No. 25/BCDFGISSSV/2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. detenu ordered detained as goonda under tn act. (Para 1) |
| 2. heard arguments and perused records. (Para 2) |
| 3. detaining authority improperly relied on non-similar bail. (Para 3) |
| 4. petition allowed; detention set aside. (Para 5) |
The petitioner is the mother of the detenu viz., Nagarajan @ Ajith Nagarajan S/o.Subbiramani, aged about 26 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Detention Order No. 25/BCDFGISSSV/2025, dated 16.07.2025, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 . The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
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. Apart from the other grounds that were raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, one of the main ground that was raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the Detaining Authority was aware of the fact that no bail petition was pending as on the date of passing of the detention order and in spite of the same, the Detaining Authority took into consideration the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1998 of 2023 dated 29.05.2023 and came to a conclusion that in a similar case, bail has been granted and therefore, there is likelihood of the detenu coming out on bail. The learned counsel submitted that the order that was relied upon by the Detaining Authority is not a similar case and hence, the detention order suffers from non-application of mind.
4. On carefully going through the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1998 of 2023 dated 29.05.2023, it is seen that bail was granted on the ground that the investigation has been completed by the prosecution. In the case in hand, investigation is pending and therefore, the order that was relied upon by the Detaining Authority is certainly not a similar case. Consequently, the detention order suffers from non-application of mind.
5. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in No.25/BCDFGISSSV/2025 dated 16.07.2025 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Nagarajan @ Ajith Nagarajan S/o.Subbiramani, aged about 26 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
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.