HCP(MD)No.1064 of 2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 07.11.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

and

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

H.C.P.(MD)No.1064 of 2023

Mariyammal

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Principal Secretary to the Government,

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,

Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate,

Thanjavur District,

Thanjavur.

3.The Superintendent of Prison,

Central Prison,

Tiruchirappalli.

: Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to

issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records pertaining to the

impugned detention order passed by the 2^nd respondent made in his

proceedings in P.D.No.49/2023 dated 26.07.2023 in detaining the detenu

under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as a Goonda and quash

the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu namely

Page 1 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP(MD)No.1064 of 2023

Duraisingam @ Manikandan, S/o.Pandidurai, Male, aged about 22 years,

who is detained in Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set

him at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran

For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar

Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.]

When the captioned 'Habeas Corpus Petition' [hereinafter 'HCP' for

the sake of brevity] was listed in the Admission Board on 23.08.2023, a

Hon'ble Coordinate Division Bench made the following order in the

Admission Board:

Page 2 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP(MD)No.1064 of 2023

2. It has now become necessary to set out a thumbnail sketch of

factual matrix and we do so in the paragraphs infra.

3. Today, the captioned matter is in the Final Hearing Board.

4. Mr.K.M.Karunakaran, learned counsel on record for HCP

petitioner and Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, learned State Additional Public

Prosecutor for all respondents are before us.

5. Captioned HCP has been filed by mother of the detenu assailing a

'preventive detention order dated 26.07.2023 bearing reference P.D.No.

49/2023' [hereinafter 'impugned preventive detention order' for the sake of

brevity and convenience]. To be noted, sponsoring authority has not been

arrayed as a respondent but we find that 'Station House Officer of

Pandanallur Police Station' is the sponsoring authority [hereinafter

'Sponsoring Authority' for the sake of convenience and clarity] and second

respondent is the detaining authority as impugned preventive detention

order has been made by second respondent.

Page 3 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP(MD)No.1064 of 2023

6. Impugned detention order has been made 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 No.14 of 1982)' [hereinafter 'Act 14 of 1982' for the

sake of convenience and clarity] on the premise that the detenu is a 'Goonda'

within the meaning of Section 2(f) of Act 14 of 1982.

7. There are three adverse cases and one ground case. The ground

case which constitutes substantial part of substratum of the impugned

preventive detention order is Crime No.363 of 2023 on the file of

Pandanallur Police Station registered under Sections 452, 294(b), 324 and

307 of 'The Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)' [hereinafter 'IPC' for the sake

of convenience and clarity] r/w Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Property

(Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1984 which was subsequently altered

into Sections 452, 294(b), 324 and 307 IPC and Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu

Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992. Considering the

nature of the challenge to the impugned detention order, it is n