Allowed

Rajamma v. The Secretary to the Government

Madras HC17 Nov 2025HCP/1214/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mother challenged preventive detention of her daughter as a 'Bootlegger' under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The court found the detention order vitiated because the subjective satisfaction about imminent release on bail relied on a bail order in a case with no previous cases, unlike the detenue's 35 cases.

What did the court decide?

Detention order dated 17.06.2025 in D.O.No.28/2025-C2 set aside; detenue Suguna @ Thattammal directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case.

Rajamma Vs The Secretary to the Government — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

HCP.No.1214 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED 17.11.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶8

H.C.P.No.1214 of 2025

¶9

Rajamma

¶10

... Petitioner

¶11

Mother of the detenue

¶12

Versus

¶13

The Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat

¶14

Chennai – 600 009

¶15

The District Collector and District Magistrate Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai

¶16

The Superintendent of Police Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai

¶17

The Superintendent of Prison Special Prison for Women, Vellore-2

¶18

The Inspector of Police Chengam Police Station Tiruvannamalai District

¶19

.. Respondents

¶20

1/6

¶21

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

¶22

HCP.No.1214 of 2025

¶23

Prayer:-

¶24

Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 17.06.2025 in D.O.No.28/2025-C2 against petitioner's daughter Suguna @ Thattammal, W/o. (Late) Palani, Female, aged 40 years, who is confined at Special Prison for Women, Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set her at liberty.

¶25

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balaji

¶26

For Respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

¶29

The petitioner, who is the mother of the detenue Suguna @ Thattammal, W/o. (Late) Palani, Female, aged 40 years, has come forward with this petition challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 17.06.2025 bearing reference D.O.No.28/2025-C2 slapped

¶30

on her daughter, branding her as "Bootlegger" under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 [Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982].

¶31

2/6

¶32

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

¶33

HCP.No.1214 of 2025

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶35

Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶36

3.Though several grounds have been raised by the petitioner in the habeas corpus petition assailing the detention order, in the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his argument only with regard to nonapplication of mind on the part of the detaining authority in arriving at the subjective satisfaction regarding imminent possibility of detenue being enlarged on bail while passing the impugned order of detention.

¶37

4.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detaining authority has arrived at the subjective satisfaction of detenue being released on bail based on the bail granted to one Suji @ Sujatha, W/o.Sampath in Crl.M.P.No.727/2023, but the facts of the said case is totally different.

¶38

The learned counsel drew the attention this Court to Page No.117

¶39

of Volume II of the booklet wherein vide order dated 01.03.2023 bail was granted to one Suji @ Sujatha, W/o.Sampath in Crl.M.P.No.727/2023. A

¶40

3/6

¶41

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

¶42

HCP.No.1214 of 2025

¶43

careful perusal of the said order, brings to light that in the said case the petitioner had no previous case but in the case on hand, the petitioner is having 35 previous cases. Therefore, taking the said bail order as the basis for arriving at subjective satisfaction regarding imminent possibility of detenue being enlarged on bail is clearly vitiated. Therefore, the impugned preventive detention order deserves to be dislodged.

¶44

In the result, the detention order passed by the 2^nd respondent dated 17.06.2025 in D.O.No.28/2025-C2 is hereby set aside and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenue viz., Suguna @ Thattammal, W/o.(Late) Palani, Female, aged 40 years, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless he is required in connection with any other case.

¶45

[N.S.K.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.] 17.11.2025

¶46

Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No gpa

¶47

4/6

¶48

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

¶49

HCP.No.1214 of 2025

¶50

¶51

The Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat

¶52

Chennai – 600 009

¶53

The District Collector and District Magistrate Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai

¶54

The Superintendent of Police Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai

¶55

The Superintendent of Prison Special Prison for Women, Vellore-2

¶56

The Inspector of Police Chengam Police Station Tiruvannamalai District

¶57

6.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

¶58

5/6

¶59

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

¶60

HCP.No.1214 of 2025

¶61

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J., AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.,

¶62

gpa

¶63

H.C.P.No.1214 of 2025

¶64

17.11.2025

¶65

6/6

¶66

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

Rajamma v. The Secretary to the Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajamma v. The Secretary to the 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

Bakkiyaraj Vs Inspector of Police

Kamala Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep by the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government

M.Saanthu Muhamed Vs The Additonal Secretary to Government of India

Ravikumar Vs Union of India

Arivanantham Vs State Rep by

Kathamuthu Vs The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government