Dismissed

K.Nagaraj, Aged 53 Years, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC4 Dec 2017HCP/1565/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition filed under Article 226 seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus to quash a detention order and produce the detenu before the Court was dismissed as the detention order had been revoked by the Government, rendering the petition infructuous.

What did the court decide?

The petition was closed as it was rendered infructuous due to the revocation of the detention order by the Government.

K.Nagaraj, Aged 53 Years, Vs the State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 04.12.2017

¶3

Coram

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER &

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

H.C.P.No.1565 of 2017

¶7

K.Nagaraj ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep., By its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri. ...Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records of the second respondent herein pertaining to the detention order made in S.C.No.45/2017 dated 25.07.2017 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body of the detenu Mr.N.Pramoth, Son of K.Nagaraj, aged about 24 years, now detained in Central Prison, Salem, before this Court and set the detenu at liberty forthwith.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Saravanan

¶10

For Respondents : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentran, Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER (Order of the Court was made by RAJIV SHAKDHER, J)

¶11

1.The petitioner is the Father of the detenu, namely, Thiru.Pramoth, S/o.Nagaraj, male, aged about 24 years. The detenu stands detained by the second respondent by virtue of his order bearing No.S.C.No.45/2017 dated 25.07.2017, wherein, he

¶12

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

¶13

has been held to be a "Sand Offender", within the meaning of Section 2(gg) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

¶14

1.1.The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶15

2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the said order of detention, passed by the second respondent against the son of the petitioner has been revoked by the Government in G.O.Rt.No.4370, Home, Prohibition & Excise (XV) Department dated 11.09.2017; a copy of the order has also been produced.

¶16

3.The submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, is taken on record. Accordingly, the petition is closed, as the same has been rendered infructuous.

¶17

Sd/-

¶18

Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶19

//True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

pam To 1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

¶21

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.

¶22

4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai. 5.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public, (Law & Order), Fort ST.George, chennai-9 H.C.P.No.1565 of 2017

¶23

BR(CO) GN(08/01/2018)

¶24

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

K.Nagaraj, Aged 53 Years, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Nagaraj, Aged 53 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

K.Karthi, Vs the Inspector of Police

SEENUVASAN,M/46 Yrs Vs the Inspector of Police

Amala, Female/Aged 28 Years Vs State of Tamilnadu, Rep.by Its

The Indian Cultural Research Vs M.a.M.R.Muthiah

G. Kuppan Vs State Rep. by

Latha, F/45 Yrs. Vs State Rep. by