The single-judge bench held that a discrepancy in the translation of prior convictions in a detention order denied the detenu an effective opportunity for representation, violating Article 22(5), and quashed the detention order.
Detention order dated 07.08.2013 quashed; Habeas Corpus Petition allowed; Detenu ordered to be set at liberty forthwith.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.06.2014
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE V.Dhanapalan and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE G.Chockalingam
H.C.P.No. 2211 of 2013
S. Josphin Mary ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamilnadu,
(Home), Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai, Egmore, Chennai.
3. The Inspector of Police
T.6 Avadi Police Station
Chennai. ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in connection with the order of Detention passed by the second respondent dated 07.08.2013 in Memo No:627/BDFGISSV/2013 and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenue before the Hon'ble Court and set the detenu Sundar @ Daniel, Son of Arumugam, aged about 32 years, now confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, at liberty.
(Order of the Court was made by V.Dhanapalan, J.)
The petitioner's husband is the detenu herein, who has been branded as a 'Goonda' and detained under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. Challenge is to the order of detention dated 07.08.2013 made in Memo No.627/BDFGISSV/2013 passed by the 2nd respondent under which the detenu has been branded as a ‘Goonda'. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
| 2. | The detenu came to adverse notic | e in the followingcase: |
|---|---|---|
| Sl. | Police Station & Crime No. | Section of Law |
| No. | ||
| 1 | T6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No.1635/2012 | Missing@ 379 IPC |
| 2 | T6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No.1802/2012 | 457 & 380 IPC |
| 3 | T1 Ambattur PS Cr. No:2294/2012 | 380 IPC |
| 4 | T6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No.1861/2012 | 380 IPC |
| 5 | T6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No.1882/2012 | 380 IPC |
| 6 | T1 Ambattur PS Cr. No:2537/2012 | 380 IPC |
| 7 | T6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No. 434/2013 | 380 IPC |
| 8 | T7 Tank Factory Police Station Cr.No.138/2013 |
454 & 380 IPC |
| 9 | T7 Tank Factory Police Station Cr.No.256/2013 |
454 & 380 IPC |
| 10 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1021/2013 | 379 IPC |
| 11 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1103/2013 | 379 IPC |
| 12 | T.7 Tank Factory Police Station Crime No: 292 / 2013 |
454 & 380 IPC |
| 13 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1074/2013 | 457 & 380 IPC |
| 14 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1101/2013 | 454 & 380 IPC |
| 15 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1104/2013 | 454 & 380 IPC |
| 16 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1125/2013 | 380 IPC |
| 17 | T.7 Tank Factory Police Station Crime No: 330 / 2013 |
454 & 380 IPC |
| 18 | T.10 Thirumullaivoyal Police Station Crime No: 783/2013 |
380 IPC |
| 19 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1265/2013 | 379 IPC |
| 20 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1446/2013 | 380 IPC |
| 21 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1426/2013 | 454 & 380 IPC |
| 22 | T.6 Avadi P.S. Cr. No:1435/2013 | 380 IPC |
The ground case alleged against the detenu is one registered on 21.07.2013 by the Inspector of Police, T-6 Avadi Police Station, Crime No.1454/2013 for offences under Sections 341, 323, 294 (b), 392, 427 r/w 397 and 506 (ii) IPC.
detention order itself, which has deprived the detenu in making effective representation to the authorities concerned and therefore, on this sole ground, the detention order is liable to be quashed.
the above submission.
"During the course of investigation, the Inspector of Police has arrested accused Thiru. Sundar @ Daniel and Thiru. Tajudeen on 21.07.2013 at about 14.10 hours near Avadi Railway Overbridge during vehicle check when the accused came there in a motor cycle and examined. On enquiry, accused Thiru.Sundar @ Daniel admitted that apart from the above case, he was involved in T-6 Avadi Police Station Crime Nos. 1635/2012, 18012/2012, 1861/2012, 1882/2012, 434/2013, 1021/2013, 1103/2013, 1074/2013, 1101/2013, 1104/2013, 1125/2013, 1265/2013, 1446/2013, 1426/2013 and 1435/2013 and T-1 Ambattur P.S. Cr. Nos: 2294/2012 and 2537/2012 and T-7 Tank Factory P.S. Cr. Nos. 138/2013, 256/2013, 292/2013 and 330/2013 and T-10 Thirumullaivoyal P.S. Cr. No. 783/2013. Accused Thiru. Tajudeen admitted that apart from the above case, he was involved in T-6 Avadi P.S. Cr. Nos. 1101/2013, 1104/2013, 1125/2013 and 1426/2013. ”
The Tamil version reads thus:
"g[yd; tprhuizapd;nghJ. fhty; Ma;thsh; mth;fs;. 21/07/2013 md;W Rkhh; 14/10 kzpastpy; Mto ,uapy; epiya nkk;ghykUfpy; thfd nrhjidapd;nghJ. nkhl;; ; ; ; lhh; irf;fspy; te;j vjphpfs; jpU/Re;jh; (v) nldpay; kw;Wk; jpU/jh$%jPd; Mfpnahiu ifJ bra;J. tprhuiz bra;jhh;/ tprhuizapd;nghJ. vjphp jpU/Re;jh; (v) nldpay; nkw;Twpa Fw;wj;jpy; kl;Lkd;wp. l;o/6 Mto fhty; epiya Fw;w vz;fs;/ 1635-2012. 1802-2012. 1861-2012. 1882-2012. 434-2013. 1021-2013. 1103-2013. 1074-2013. 1101-2013. 1104-2013. 1125-2013. 1265-2013. 1446-2013. 1426-2013 kw;Wk; 1435-2013 Fw;w';fspYk; jdf;Fj; bjhlh;gpUg;gjhf xg;g[f; bfhz;lhh;/ vjphp jpU/jh$%jPd; vd;gth;. nkw;Twpa Fw;wj;jpy; kl;Lkd;wp l;o 6 Mto fhty; epiya Fw;w vz;fs;/ 1101-2013. 1104-2013. 1125-2013 kw;Wk; 14262013 Fw;w';fspYk; jdf;Fj; bjhlh;gpUg;gjhf xg;g[f; bfhz;lhh;/ "
“ T-1 Ambattur P.S. Cr. Nos: 2294/2012 and 2537/2012 and T-7 Tank Factory P.S. Cr. Nos. 138/2013, 256/2013, 292/2013 and 330/2013 and T-10 Thirumullaivoyal P.S. Cr. No. 783/2013.”
Thus, when there is discrepancy between English and Tamil version of the detention order itself, the opportunity of making effective representation upon knowledge of the factual situation stands denied to the detenu and the same, which amounts to infringement of right ensured under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, would vitiate the order of detention.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
gp
To :
1. The Commissioner of Police,
Commissioner Office,
Greater Chennai,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2. The Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu,
Prohibition and Excise Department (Home),
Secretariat, Fort St. George,
Chennai 600 009.
3. The Inspector of Police
T.6 Avadi Police Station
Chennai.
4. The Superintendent
Central Prison, Puzhal,Chennai
5. The Joint Secretary to Government
Public (Law and order) Fort Saint George,
Chennai
6. The Public Prosecutor
High Court of Madras,Chennai 600 104.
H.C.P. No. 2211 of 2013
JSV (CO)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a detention order which fails to translate allegations of prior conviction in other police stations violates the right to make effective representation under Article 22(5).
Whether the discrepancy between the English and Tamil versions of the detention order on which the petitioner was relying vitiates the detention order.
Whether the detention order dated 07.08.2013 should be quashed due to the deficiency in translation affecting the rights of the detenu.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Article 22(5) of the Constitution of IndiaExplained¶24
S. Josphin Mary
The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamilnadu
The Commissioner of Police
The Inspector of Police
V. Dhanapalan
G. Chockalingam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
