Disposed

Devi v. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Its

Madras HC27 Aug 2021HCP/319/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226 for release via habeas corpus, the petitioner challenged a detention order under the Sand Offenders Act. The Court observed that the impugned detention order had already been revoked by the Government. Consequently, the Court held that nothing survived in the petition and accordingly closed the matter without granting any specific relief.

What the court decided

AI extract

Devi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 27.08.2021

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Honourable Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH and The Honourable Ms. Justice R.N.MANJULA

H.C.P.No.319 of 2020

Devi

...Petitioner

Vs.

State of Tamil Nadu represented by The Principal Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.

¶10

The District Collector and District Magistrate, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai – 606 604.

¶11

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore – 632 002. ...Respondents

¶12

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records of the detention order vide D.O.No.03/2020-C2 dated 27.01.2020 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same and produce the petitioner's husband Ramesh, S/o.Govindasamy, aged 40 years, confined at Central Prison, Vellore, before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Kannan Kumar

¶14

ORDER

¶15

[Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.]

¶16

The petitioner challenges the impugned order of detention in D.O.No.03/2020-C2 dated 27.01.2020 detaining her husband as

¶17

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

¶18

“Sand Offender”, as contemplated under Section 2(gg) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

¶19

It is seen that the detention order in this case has been revoked by the Government vide order dated 16.03.2020 and hence, nothing survives in this habeas corpus petition and the same is accordingly closed.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

nsd

¶25

¶26

The Principal Secretary to Government,

¶27

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Government of Tamil Nadu,

¶28

Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.

¶29

The District Collector and District Magistrate, Tiruvannamalai District,

¶30

Tiruvannamalai – 606 604.

¶31

The Superintendent, Central Prison,

¶32

Vellore – 632 002.

¶33

The Joint Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 9.

¶34

The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai – 600 104.

¶35

H.C.P.No.319 of 2020

¶36

RGN(CO) LS(21/09/2021)

¶37

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

Devi v. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Devi v. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Magudeeswaran, M/A.28 Vs State by

M.Nagamani Vs Anandarogiyaraj

Malarkodi Vs the Superintendent of Police

Latha Vs the Secretary to the Government

Parimala Vs the Secretary to the Government

R.Sakthivel Vs State Rep.by Its