Allowed

Shabiya v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC9 Oct 2020HCP/697/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A habeas corpus petition filed by the wife of a detained individual challenging an order under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The court held that providing illegible copies of documents deprived the detenu of the right to effective representation and quashed the detention order.

What did the court decide?

The order of detention in Cr.M.P.No.164/BGDFGISSSV/2020 dated 06.03.2020 passed by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu is directed to be released forthwith.

Shabiya Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09.10.2020

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

H.C.P. No. 697 of 2020

¶6

Shabiya ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.State of Tamilnadu
Rep by the Secretary to Government
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2.The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai
Veppery, Chennai 600 007
3.The Superintendent of Prisons
Central Prison-2, Puzhal
Chennai 600 066
4.The Inspector of Police
H-8, Thiruvotriyur Police Station
Chennai 600 019 ... Respondents

¶7

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus or appropriate writ order or direction to call for the entire records from the 2nd respondent in connection with order in Cr.M.P.No.164/BGDFGISSSV/2020 dated 06.03.2020 and quash the same and produce my husband namely Mohammed Azharedeen, S/o. Allah Pichai, aged 33 years now confined in Central Prison-2, Puzhal, Chennai 600 066 under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.P. Pugalenthi

¶9

For Respondents :^{Mr.R.Prathap Kumar,} Addl. Public Prosecutor

¶10

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

¶11

ORDER

¶12

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

¶13

The petitioner is the wife of Mohammed Azharudeen, S/o. Allah Pichai, aged 33 years, who is the detenu. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent in connection with order in Cr.M.P.No.164/BGDFGISSSV/2020 dated 06.03.2020, 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.

¶14

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents and we have also perused the records carefully.

¶15

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.

¶16

4.On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record, especially Form 91 pertaining to the similar case at Page No.117 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.

¶17

In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in Cr.M.P.No.164/BGDFGISSSV/2020 dated 06.03.2020 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Mohammed Azharedeen, S/o. Allah Pichai, aged 33 years is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

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

¶21

mmi/ssm

¶22

¶23

1.The Secretary to Government
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009
2. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai, Veppery, Chennai 600 007
3. The Superintendent of Prisons
Central Prison-2, Puzhal
Chennai 600 066.
4. The Inspector of Police
H-8, Thiruvotriyur Police Station
Chennai 600 019.
5.The Joint Secretary
Public (law & order)Department
Secretary , Chennai-9.
6.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
H.C.P. No. 697 of 2020
SSI(CO)
RMP(21/10/2020)

¶24

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

Shabiya v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shabiya 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

Kasthuri Vs Union of India

Revathi Vs the Secretary to Government

Subramanian Vs the State of Tamilnadu

S.Paramasivam Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Sudarmathi Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Varalakshmi @ Kokila Vs the Secretary to Govt