Usha v. the Secretary to the
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court quashed the detention order against a 'Goonda' accused because the reinvestigation report appended lacked explicit mention of remand extension, violating Article 22(5) rights to make effective representation.
What did the court decide?
The detention order dated 12.09.2013 was quashed, and the detenu was directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in another case.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 16.06.2014
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.DHANAPALAN
and
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM
H.C.P.No.2228 of 2013
Usha ...Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Secretary to the Government,
Home, Prohibition & Excise Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai 600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police,
Chennai Police,
Egmore, Chennai. ...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for the issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus, to call
for the records in connection with the order of Detention passed by
the 2 nd respondent dated 12.09.2013 in No.972/BDFGISSV/2013 against
the brother of the petitioner, Gopal @ Kamal, M/A, 25, Son of
Duraisamy, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and to
set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce
the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Kaviarasu
For Respondents : Mr.P.Govindarajan
Addl. Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by V.Dhanapalan,J.)
The petitioner is the sister of the detenu. The detenu has been branded as a "Goonda" under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and detained under the order of the 2nd respondent passed in Memo No.972/BDFGISSV/2013 dated 12.09.2013.
- The detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases:-
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a detention order vitiates if the reinvestigation report appended does not clearly mention the extension of remand?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Usha
- respondent
The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition & Excise Department
- respondent
The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Police
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court