Allowed

Kalavathi v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC12 Sept 2025HCP(MD)/1105/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Habeas corpus petition challenging detention of the petitioner's husband as a 'Drug Offender'. Records showed only Volume II (referred documents) was furnished; Volume I (relied-upon documents) was not supplied despite representations. The court held this violated Section 8(1), quashed the detention order and directed release.

What did the court decide?

Detention Order No.30/2025 dated 02.07.2025 set aside; detenu Parthiban directed to be released forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.

Kalavathi Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 12.09.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

Kalavathi

... Petitioner

-vs-

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government,

¶11

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat,

¶12

Chennai-600009.

¶13

The District Collector and District Magistrate, Office of the District Collector and District Magistrate, Theni District.

¶14

The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai. ... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records, connected with the detention order of the respondent No.2 in Detention

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

¶19

order No.30/2025 dated 02.07.2025 and Quash the same and direct the Respondents to produce the detenu by name Parthiban, son of Goolpandi 50 years, now detained as “Drug Offender” at Madurai Central Prison before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

¶20

For Petitioner : Dr.R.Alagumani

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

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

¶24

This petition has been filed seeking to produce the detenu Parthiban, who is the husband of the petitioner, who had been detained by an order of the second respondent dated 02.07.2025 in Detention Order No.30/2025, categorizing him as “Drug Offender”. He is now under detained in Madurai Central Prison.

¶25

2 . We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

¶26

_____________ Page 2 of 6_

¶27

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

¶28

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

¶29

respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

¶30

3. The matter came up for admission on

¶31

yesterday/11.09.2025. At that time, though the learned Additional Public prosecutor has taken notice and sought time to file counter, it had been informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the detenu was not served with copies of the documents, which were actually relied on by the Detaining Authority while passing the detention order. It had been contended that this was infraction of the mandatory condition imposed and stipulated in Section 8(1) of the 2(f) of 'The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber law offenders, Drugoffenders, Forest-offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic offenders, Sandoffenders, Sexual-offenders, Slum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act No.14 of 1982)' [hereinafter referred to as 'Act 14 of 1982']. That particular provision makes it mandatory for the Detaining Authority to provide not only the documents relied on by the Detaining Authority, but also the documents which were referred to by the

¶32

_____________ Page 3 of 6_

¶33

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

¶34

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

¶35

Detaining Authority to the detenu within five days from the date of detention order.

¶36

4. To verify, we had called upon the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to produce the original records from the Central Prison at Madurai, from the custody of the Superintendent of Central Prison and it is seen that though it reflects that on 03.07.2025, II volumes had been received, the fact is that two copies of Volume II of the documents, which were referred to by the Detaining Authority alone had been handed over to the detenu and Volume I, which contains the documents which were relied on by the Detaining Authority had not been handed over to the detenu. Naturally, the detenu was handicapped in not giving any effective representation questioning the detention order and this is a direct violation of his personal right and liberty. It is also informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the detenu had immediately given representations complaining that Volume I documents had not been furnished to him, but still that had not been furnished him. We held that this ground has to be viewed very seriously and therefore, the detention order suffers and the same is liable to be quashed.

¶37

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶38

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

¶39

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

¶40

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also raised an issue

¶41

of compensation to be paid, but we will leave that issue open to be addressed in the manner known to law, if a formal request in that regard is presented.

¶42

6 . In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of Detention Order No.30/2025, dated 02.07.2025, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Parthiban, S/o.Goolpandi, aged about 50 years, is directed to be released forthwith

¶43

unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶44

[C.V.K., J.] [R.V., J.] 12.09.2025

¶45

vsm

¶46

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

¶47

_____________ Page 5 of 6_

¶48

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

¶49

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

¶50

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. and R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

¶51

vsm

¶52

¶53

The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600009.

¶54

The District Collector and District Magistrate, Office of the District Collector and District Magistrate, Theni District.

¶55

The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai.

¶56

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

¶57

H.C.P.(MD)No.1105 of 2025

¶58

12.09.2025

¶59

_____________ Page 6 of 6_

¶60

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

Kalavathi v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalavathi v. The State of Tamil Nadu

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

Selvakumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

Marimuthu Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

A.Jayashree Vs The Commissioner of Police

D.Asha @ Sahaya Asha, Vs v.Siluvai Dhasan

Manojkumar Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

G.Murugan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu