Allowed

Banu v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC3 Jul 2020HCP/69/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus writ petition, the High Court set aside a detention order against a drug offender. The court quashed the order solely on the ground that the detenu was deprived of effective representation because the remand order was not properly translated into the vernacular language.

What did the court decide?

The order of detention dated 14.12.2019 is set aside and the detenu is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in another case.

Banu Vs the Secretary to Government — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 03.07.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

H.C.P. NO. 69 OF 2020

¶6

Banu ...Petitioner -vs1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Chennai. ...Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus to call for the records in connection with the order of Detention passed by the second respondent 14.12.2019 in No.866/BCDFGISSSV/2019 against the petitioner son Mr.Boss @ Baskaran male aged about 24 years son of Suthi Murugan, who is confined at Central Prison Puzhal, Chennai, and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶7

ORDER

¶8

[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.]

¶9

The petitioner is the mother of Boss @ Baskaran male aged about 24 years son of Suthi Murugan, who is the detenu. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in No.866/BCDFGISSSV/2019, dated 14.12.2019, holding him to be a "Drug Offender", as contemplated under Section 2(e) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶10

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

¶11

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

¶12

3.Though the 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 remand order has not been properly translated in vernacular language. This deprived the detenu from making effective representation. Therefore, on this sole ground, the detention order is liable to be quashed.

¶13

4.On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record especially Page Nos.28 and 29 of the booklet, it is clear that the remand order has not been properly translated in vernacular language. Thus the impugned detention order is liable to be set aside on this ground.

¶14

5.In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in No.866/BCDFGISSSV/2019, dated 14.12.2019, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Boss @ Baskaran male aged about 24 years son of Suthi Murugan, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶15

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS I) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶16

raa/mmi/ssm

¶17

¶18

1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶19

2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Chennai.

¶20

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶21

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

¶22

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶23

5.The Joint Secretary, Public (Law & Order), Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

¶24

H.C.P. No. 69 of 2020

¶25

MP(CO)
KKV/19/08/2020

¶26

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

Banu v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banu v. the Secretary to Government

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

Navaneetham Vs the Secretary to Government

Deepa Vs the Secretary to Government

Annammal Vs the Secretary to Government

Kalaiselvi Vs State Rep. by

Malar Vs the State of Tamilnadu

M.Geetha Vs the Inspector of Police