Dismissed

Periya Samy v. the Secretary to the

Madras HC17 Mar 2016HCP/2523/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A father filed a habeas corpus petition regarding the detention of his son under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The Court closed the petition as infructuous after the Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the detention order had already been revoked by the Government.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed as infructuous since the detention order was revoked by the Government.

Periya Samy Vs the Secretary to the — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 17.3.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN

¶5

and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU

¶7

H.C.P.No.2523 of 2015

¶8

Periya Samy ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai 2. The Commissioner of Police Chennai City ... Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus calling for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the 2^nd respondent dated 24.8.2015 in Memo No.BCDFGISSV/778/2015 against the petitioner son Siva, Male aged 23 years, s/o.Periyasamy, who is confined at Central prison, Puzhal II, Chennai, and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthilvel For RR 1 & 2 : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN J.)

¶9

The petitioner, who is the father of the the detenu herein by name Siva, S/o.Periyasamy, aged 23 years, has come forward with this petition challenging the detention order passed by the 2^nd respondent dated 24.8.2015 against his son branding him as a "Goonda" under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

¶10

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

¶11

2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the order of detention passed by the 2^nd respondent as against the son of the petitioner dated 24.8.2015 has been revoked by the Government in G.O.Rt.No.6332, dated 8.10.2015 and he has also produced a copy of the said order.

¶12

Recording the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this petition is closed as the same has become infructuous.

¶13

Sd/-

¶14

Assistant Registrar(CS II)

¶15

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Secretary to the Government
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
Secretariat, Chennai
2. The Commissioner of Police
Chennai City
3. The Superintendent,
Central Prison,
Puzhal II, Chennai.

¶16

The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court, Madras.

¶17

H.C.P.No.2523 of 2015

¶18

KJI(CO) CA(06/04/2016)

¶19

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

Periya Samy v. the Secretary to the

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Periya Samy v. the Secretary to the

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

Thenmozhi Vs the Superintendent of Police

T.Ellammal Vs State Rep. by

K.Lalitha Vs the Inspector of Police

Tamarai Vs the Secretary to Govt.

Nandhini Vs the Secretary to Govt.

Rekha Vs the Secretary to Government