Allowed

Aamina Beevi v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Madras HC9 Dec 2024HCP(MD)/732/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition challenging the legality of her son's detention as a 'Goonda' due to an unexplained five-day delay in his representation against the detention order. The Court held the delay fatal to the continuance of detention, violating Article 21, and ordered his release.

What did the court decide?

The impugned detention order is quashed, and the detenu Mohamed Mubarak is set at liberty forthwith unless lawfully warranted.

Aamina Beevi Vs The Principal Secretary to Government — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

H.C.P.(MD)No.732 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

¶6

H.C.P.(MD)No.732 of 2024

¶7

Aamina Beevi

¶8

... Petitioner / Mother of Detenu

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶11

2.The Commissioner of Police, Tiruchirappalli City, Tiruchirappalli.

¶12

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned detention order passed by the 2nd respondent made in his proceedings in C.No.53/Detention/C.P.O/T.C/2024 dated 08.06.2024 in detaining the detenu under section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as a Goonda and quash the same and direct the

¶14

1/4

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

H.C.P.(MD)No.732 of 2024

¶17

respondents to produce the detenu namely, Mohamed Mubarak @ Thakkali, S/o.Mohamed Yahoop, Male, aged about 32 years, who is detained in Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthilkumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor.

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

(Order of the court was delivered by G.R.Swaminathan, J.)

¶22

The petitioner's son was detained as “Goonda” vide order dated 08.06.2024 by the second respondent. Representation dated 20.06.2024 was submitted for revocation of the detention order. The Under Secretary dealt with the file on 27.06.2024. The Deputy Secretary dealt with the file on 05.07.2024. There is an unexplained delay of five days in dealing with the representation. We are satisfied that the detenu's right guaranteed under Article 22 of the Constitution of India has been infringed. It is well settled that delay in considering the representation of the detenu is fatal to the continuance of the detention.

¶23

2/4

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

H.C.P.(MD)No.732 of 2024

¶26

2.In this view of the matter, we hold that the detenu's continued

¶27

detention is illegal. He shall be set at liberty forthwith unless his

¶28

detention is otherwise warranted by law.

¶29

3.This habeas corpus petition is allowed accordingly.

¶30

(G.R.S. J.,) & (R.P. J.,) 09.12.2024

¶31

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias Issue order copy on 10.12.2024.

¶32

To:-

¶33

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶34

2.The Commissioner of Police, Tiruchirappalli City, Tiruchirappalli.

¶35

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli.

¶36

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

H.C.P.(MD)No.732 of 2024

¶40

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. and R.POORNIMA, J.

¶41

ias

¶42

H.C.P.(MD)No.732 of 2024

¶43

09.12.2024

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

4/4

Aamina Beevi v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aamina Beevi v. The Principal 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

Shanmugaraj Vs The Inspector of Police

Pandiarajan @ Pandiaraja Vs The Inspector of Police

Babin Stella Vs The Secretary to Government

The Branch Manager Vs Kalayarasi

The Commissioner of Customs Vs Srinidhi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd.

S.Nithya Vs The Principal Secretary to Government