Dismissed

Malar v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC3 Jul 2020HCP/751/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought to quash her husband's detention order and direct his release. The court dismissed the petition after the Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the detention order was cancelled by the District Collector and District Magistrate on 27.06.2020.

What did the court decide?

The habeas corpus petition was dismissed because the detention order had been cancelled by the District Collector and District Magistrate.

Malar Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Writ and Judicial Review | 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. 751 of 2020

Malar

...Petitioner

-vs-

State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home,Prohibition & Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

¶10

The District Collector and District Magistrate of Vellore District, Vellore.

¶11

The Superintendent of Police, Vellore District, Vellore.

¶12

The Inspector of Police, Prohibition and Enforcement Wing, Vellore, Vellore District, Central Prison, Vellore. 5. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus to call for the entire records, relating to my husband's detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order, dated 02.04.2020 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceedings in C3/D.O.No.26/2020, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the Petitioner's husband namely Murugan son of Govindan, aged 40 years before this Court and set my husband at liberty from detention, now petitioner's husband detained at Central prison, Vellore.

¶14

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

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.C.C.Chellappan

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER

¶18

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

¶19

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that the detention order in C3/D.O.No.26/2020 dated 02.04.2020 has not been approved by the Government and the same has been cancelled by the proceedings of the District Collector and District Magistrate, Vellore District dated 27.06.2020.

¶20

2.In view of the submission made by the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor, this habeas corpus petition stands dismissed.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
raa/mmi/ssm
To
1.The Secretary,
Home,Prohibition & Excise Department,
Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2.The District Collector and
District Magistrate of Vellore District,
Vellore.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Vellore District, Vellore.
4.The Inspector of Police,
Prohibition and Enforcement Wing,
Vellore, Vellore District,
Central Prison, Vellore.

¶21

5.The Joint Secretary to Government Public (Law and order) Fort. St. George Chennai 9.

¶22

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

¶23

6.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

¶24

7.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶25

H.C.P. No.751 of 2020

¶26

SSV(CO)
SP(30/07/2020)

¶27

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

Malar v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malar v. the State of Tamilnadu

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

Banu Vs the Secretary to Government

M.Geetha Vs the Inspector of Police