Rani v. State Rep by
Case brief
What is this about?
In a habeas corpus petition, the Madras High Court set aside an illegal detention order. The court quashed the order because the remand order was not properly translated into vernacular language, depriving the detenu of effective representation.
What did the court decide?
The detention order dated 13.03.2021 is set aside, and the detenu is directed to be released forthwith unless required for another case.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.10.2021
Coram
The Honourable Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH and The Honourable Mrs. Justice S.SRIMATHY
H.C.P.No.585 of 2021
Rani .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. 4.State represented by The Inspector of Police, S-6, Sankar Nagar Police Station, Chennai District. .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to calling for the entire records relating to the petitioner's son detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order, dated 13.03.2021 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceedings Memo BCDFGISSSV.No.72/2021, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner's son viz., Sugumar, S/o.Kumar, aged 28 years, before this Court and set the petitioner's son at liberty from detention, now the petitioner's son detained at the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the detention order is liable to be set aside as the remand order was not properly translated in vernacular language.
Whether the failure by the detaining authority to furnish legible copies of documents relied on deprived the detenu of making effective representation.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Rani
- respondent
Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
- respondent
Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai
- respondent
Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal
- respondent
State represented by The Inspector of Police, S-6, Sankar Nagar Police Station
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court