Kalaiselvan Vs The Additional Chief Secretary to Government

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records pertaining to the Detention Order passed by the 2^nd respondent made in Cr.M.P.No. 04/2025, dated 20.01.2025 under section 2(f) of Tamilnadu Act, 14 of 1982 as a Goonda and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of detenu namely Ranjithkumar, Son of

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

H.C.P(MD)No.1073 of 2025

¶17

Kalaiselvan, Male aged about 30 years, who is now detained at Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Vadivel

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar

¶20

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.)

¶23

The petitioner is the father of the detenu viz., Ranjithkumar,

¶24

S/o.Kalaiselvan, aged about 30 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent in Cr.M.P.No.04/2025, dated 20.01.2025 holding him to be a 'Goonda', as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this habeas corpus petition.

¶25

2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

¶26

2/6

¶27

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

¶28

H.C.P(MD)No.1073 of 2025

¶29

3 . Though several points have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is stated that the detention order is liable to be quashed on the ground that the remand order of the Judicial Magistrate-I, Kulithalai have been written in free hand, which is indecipherable and cannot be read. Hence, it is submitted that the detenu was deprived of making effective representation.

¶30

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents has opposed this Habeas Corpus Petition by filing counter.

¶31

5. On a perusal of the booklet, it is seen that the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai had remanded the accused by writing down the order in free hand, which is indecipherable and cannot be read and it is not known whether the typed version at page No.87 of the booklet is a proper translation of the remand order. We, therefore, have no hesitation in quashing the impugned detention order.

¶32

6. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detention order passed in Cr.M.P.No.04/2025, dated 20.01.2025 by the

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

H.C.P(MD)No.1073 of 2025

¶36

2 nd

¶37

2^nd respondent, is set aside. Consequently, the detenu viz., Ranjithkumar, S/o.Kalaiselvan, aged about 30 years, is directed to be released forthwith, unless his presence or custody or detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶38

(C.V.K., J.) (R.V., J.) 23.10.2025

¶39

Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes

¶40

vsm

¶41

4/6

¶42

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

¶43

H.C.P(MD)No.1073 of 2025