Allowed

Vinoth @ Vinothkumar v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC16 Jul 2025HCP(MD)/1403/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Detenu challenged his preventive detention as a 'Goonda' under a detention order dated 16.10.2024, arguing his representation was delayed in transmission by prison authorities. The court found an inordinate seven-day delay in forwarding the representation to the detaining authority, vitiating the detention order, and allowed the habeas corpus petition.

What did the court decide?

Detention Order No.97/2024 dated 16.10.2024 set aside; detenu directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.

Vinoth @ Vinothkumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

HCP(MD)No.1403 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 16.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

¶6

HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD)No.1403 of 2024

Vinoth @ Vinothkumar

... Petitioner

vs.

The Principal Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai -600 009.

¶11

The District Magistrate and District Collector, O/o. the District Magistrate and District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

¶12

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records, connected with the detention order of the respondent No.2 in Detention Order No.97 / 2024, dated 16.10.2024 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu by name Vinoth @ Vinothkumar, son of Natarajan, aged about 28 years, now confining at Madurai Central Prison and set him at liberty forthwith.

¶15

Page No.1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

For Petitioner : Dr. R. Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶18

HCP(MD)No.1403 of 2024

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. ]

¶21

The petitioner is the detenu viz., Vinoth @ Vinothkumar, son of Natarajan, aged about 28 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Detention Order No.97 / 2024, dated 16.10.2024, 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.

¶22

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶23

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

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the

¶25

detention order is dated 16.10.2024 and it was served on the petitioner on 17.10.2024. The petitioner had sent a representation, dated 22.10.2024 to the

¶26

Page No.2 of 5

¶27

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

¶28

HCP(MD)No.1403 of 2024

¶29

detaining authority through the Prison authorities. The said representation was received by the Prison authorities on 23.10.2024. However, it has not been forwarded to the detaining authority till it was confirmed by the District Collector on 27.10.2024. This indicates that the Prison authorities failed to forward the representation in a timely manner, thereby infracted the petitioner's right to make an effective representation and thus vitiating the detention order.

¶30

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submits that the representation, dated 22.10.2024 was served on the detaining authority only on 30.10.2024.

¶31

Upon perusal of the records, it is evident that the petitioner’s representation dated 22.10.2024 was received by the prison authorities on 23.10.2024. However, there was an inordinate delay of seven days in forwarding the same to the detaining authority and thereby, vitiating the detention order.

¶32

In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in Detention Order No.97 / 2024, dated 16.10.2024, passed

¶33

Page No.3 of 5

¶34

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

¶35

HCP(MD)No.1403 of 2024

¶36

by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Vinoth @ Vinothkumar, son of Natarajan, aged about 28 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless

¶37

his detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶38

[A.D.J.C., J.] [R.P., J.] 16.07.2025

¶39

Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No trp To:

¶40

The Principal Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai -600 009.

¶41

The District Magistrate and District Collector, O/o. the District Magistrate and District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

¶42

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District.

¶43

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madars High Court, Madurai.

¶44

Page No.4 of 5

¶45

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

¶46

HCP(MD)No.1403 of 2024

¶47

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. AND R.POORNIMA, J.

¶48

trp

¶49

ORDER MADE IN HCP(MD)No.1403 of 2024

¶50

DATED : 16.07.2025

¶51

Page No.5 of 5

¶52

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

Vinoth @ Vinothkumar v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinoth @ Vinothkumar v. The State of Tamilnadu

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

Sathishkumar Vs The Superintendent of Prison

M.Pothumponnu Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

George Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Raja Mohammed Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

A. Lakshmipriya Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Superintendent of Police

Jotheeswari Vs The State of Tamil Nadu