The High Court allowed a habeas corpus petition challenging a detention order. Ruling that illegible copies of documents denied the detenu effective representation, the Court quashed the order and directed release.
The order of detention is set aside, and the detenu is directed to be released forthwith unless required for any other case.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.10.2020
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.KRISHNAKUMAR
H.C.P. No. 412 of 2020
Jothi ... Petitioner /Wife of the detenue
Vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9. 2.District Collector & District Magistrate, Vellore District, Vellore - 9. ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 14.02.2020 in C3 D.O.No.16/2020 against the petitioner's husband Micheal @ Uma Mageswaran, male, aged 31 years, S/o.Doss, who is confined at Central Prison, Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.
ORDER
The petitioner is the wife of Micheal @ Uma Mageswaran, male, aged 31 years, S/o.Doss, who is the detenu. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in C3 D.O.No.16/2020 dated 14.02.2020 holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
3.Though learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the order of detention, he has mainly focused his argument on the ground that the detaining authority, while detaining the detenu, has not furnished the legible copies of the documents relied on by him. This deprived the detenu from making effective representation. Therefore, on this sole ground, the detention order is liable to be quashed.
4.On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record, especially the bail petition pertaining to the similar case at Page Nos.78 and 79 of the booklet, it is clear that the detaining authority, by providing illegible copies of the documents, has taken away the rights of detenu to effectively defend himself against his detention. Thus the impugned detention order is liable to be set aside on this ground.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
H.C.P. No.412 of 2020
ns[co]
srg 02/11/2020
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the habeas corpus petition is maintainable to challenge an order of detention.
Whether illegible copies of documents relied upon by the detaining authority deprive the detenu of effective representation.
Whether the detention order must be set aside due to the failure to provide legible copies of supporting documents.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jothi
The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
District Collector & District Magistrate, Vellore District
M.M.SUNDRESH
D.KRISHNAKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
