Dismissed

R.Ramana v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC15 Dec 2016HCP/1292/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition filed by the wife of a detenu, the petitioner sought to quash a detention order under the TN Goonda Act. The court found the detention order had been revoked by the Government, rendering the petition infructuous, and dismissed the matter.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed as the detention order was found to have been revoked by the Government.

R.Ramana Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 15.12.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN

¶5

H.C.P.No.1292 of 2016

¶6

R.Ramana .. Petitioner Vs

¶7

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep by its Principal Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Collectorate, Namakkal District. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem. .. Respondents

¶8

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, calling for the records relating to the detention order passed by the second respondent, dated 8.6.2016, in C.M.P.No.17/Goonda.2016/M1, and to quash the same and consequently, to produce the detenu Gulabi @ Rajesh, aged about 29 years, son of Rangasamy, before this Court and to set him at liberty, forthwith, from the Central Prison, Salem.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Vijendran For Respondents : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, Additional Public Prosecutor - - - - ORDER

¶10

(Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN,J.)

¶11

This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed, by the wife of the detenu, namely, Gulabi @ Rajesh, aged about 29 years, son of Rangasamy, praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records, in

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

C.M.P.No.17/Goondas/2016/M1, dated 8.6.2016, passed by the second Respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), branding him as a “Goonda”, in the Central Prison, Salem, and to quash the same and to direct the Respondents to produce the body of the detenu and set him at liberty forthwith.

¶14

2 At this stage of the hearing of the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents would submit that the order of detention passed by the second respondent, against the husband of the petitioner, dated 8.6.2016, has been revoked by the Government, in G.O. Rt. No.3307, Home, Prohibition and Excise (XIV) Department, dated 22.7.2016 and he has also produced a copy of the said order.

¶15

3 Recording the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this petition is dismissed, as infructuous.

Sd/-

Asst.Registrar

/true copy/

Sub Asst. Registrar

vvk

1.The Secretary,

The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶24

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,

¶25

Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶26

2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Collectorate, Namakkal District.

¶27

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶28

+1cc to M/s P.Vijendran Advocate sr.73252

¶29

H.C.P.No.1292 of 2016

¶30

sai(co) ss(12/01/2017)

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Ramana v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Ramana v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M. Rajeswari, Vs the Secretary to the Govt.

M.Manimegalai Vs the Secretary to Government

Peachiammal Vs the Secretary to Government

M.Delhi Babu, Aged 27 Years Vs Inspector of Police

Mr.Samuvel Jayaraj, Aged 63YRS Vs the Superintendent of Police

Suresh, Aged 33 Years Vs the Superintendent of Police