Dismissed

Jayanthi 21 Years v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC4 Oct 2016HCP/997/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition to quash her husband's detention order and secure his release. The Court found the detention order had already been revoked by the Government, rendering the petition infructuous, and dismissed it.

What did the court decide?

The detention order was noted as already revoked; the petition for release and quashing was dismissed as infructuous.

Jayanthi 21 Years Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 04.10.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN

¶5

H.C.P.No.997 of 2016

¶6

Jayanthi ... Petitioner
vs.
1. State of Tamilnadu
rep.by the Secretary
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai 9
2.The Commissioner of Police
The Commissioner Office
Vepery, Chennai 600 007 ... Respondents

¶7

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus calling for the records in relating to the detention order in Memo No.355/BCDFGISSSV/2016, dated 29.03.2016, passed by the 2nd respondent under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and set aside the same and direct the respondent to produce the petitioner's husband HARRIS @ HARIHARAN, S/o.Madhusoodanan, aged about 24 years, the detenu, now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and set the petitioner's husband Harris @ Hariharan, Son of Madhusoodanan, aged about 24 years, the detenue herein at liberty.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Soundar Rajan

¶9

For Respondents : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, APP

¶10

ORDER

¶11

(Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM,J.)

¶12

This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the records relating to detention order, dated 29.03.2016, passed in No.355/BCDFGISSSV/2016, by the detaining authority, who has been arrayed as the second respondent herein, against the detenu, by name Harris @ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Hariharan, son of Madhusoodanan and quash the same.

¶13

2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has represented that the detention order in question has already been revoked by the Government of Tamil Nadu by virtue of G.O.Rt No.2332, dated 19.05.2016 and to that effect a copy of the same has been submitted. This Court has perused the same and ultimately found that the detention order in question has already been revoked.

¶14

Since the detention order in question has already been revoked, the relief sought in the petition has become infructuous.

¶15

In fine, this habeas corpus petition is dismissed.

¶16

msk
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-II)
/TRUE COPY/
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai 9
2.The Commissioner of Police
The Commissioner Office
Vepery, Chennai 600 007
3. THE SUPERINTENT,
CENTRAL PRISON,
PUZHAL, CHENNAI.
4.THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT, CHENNAI.
H.C.P.No.997 of 2016
CNR[CO]
MK:20/10/2016

¶17

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

¶18

04.10.2016

¶19

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

Jayanthi 21 Years v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanthi 21 Years v. the State 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

Saraswathi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

R.Senthil Vs the Inspector of Police

M/S. Madras Elastomers Ltd. Vs Kamal Chand

D.Anjali Vs the Secretary to the

Mrs.Divyabharathi Vs the Secretary to Government

R.Subramani Vs the Secretary to Government