Allowed

Santhi v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC5 Aug 2025HCP(MD)/1568/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife challenged preventive detention of her husband as a 'Drug Offender' under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, contending the detaining authority had no material for its subjective satisfaction. The Court found no record that she was pursuing bail in the ground case and quashed the detention as vitiated by non-application of mind.

What did the court decide?

Order of detention P.D.No.58/2024 quashed; detenu Sivakumar directed to be released forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.

Santhi Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

HCP(MD)No. 1568 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.08.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

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

¶6

HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD)No.1568 of 2024

Santhi

... Petitioner

vs.

State of Tamil Nadu

¶11

rep. by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai -600 009.

¶12

The District Magistrate and District Collectorate, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶13

3.The Inspector of Police, Pappanadu Police Station, Thanjavur District.

¶14

4.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Trichy.

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records, relating to the detention order passed by the 2^nd respondent in Detention order in P.D.No.58 / 2024 dated 17.11.2024 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenue Sivakumar, Son of Raja, Male aged 45 years who is detained at Central

¶17

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

¶18

Page No.1 of 5

¶19

HCP(MD)No. 1568 of 2024

¶20

Prison, Trichy, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

¶21

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

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

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

¶24

The petitioner is the wife of the detenu viz., Sivakumar, Son of Raja, aged 45 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in P.D.No.58 / 2024 dated 17.11.2024, holding him to be a "Drug Offender", as contemplated under Section 2(e) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this habeas corpus petition.

¶25

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

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that,

¶27

though in paragraph No. 7 of the grounds of detention it is stated that Tmt. Santhi, wife of Sivakumar, is taking action to take out her husband Sivakumar,

¶28

on bail in the ground case wherein there is no material evidence to substantiate Page No.2 of 5

¶29

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

¶30

HCP(MD)No. 1568 of 2024

¶31

this claim. Therefore, it is evident that the detaining authority, without sufficient material, has mechanically arrived at the subjective satisfaction based solely on

¶32

the information provided by the sponsoring authority. As such, the entire detention order stands vitiated and is liable to be set aside.

¶33

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that after satisfying with the materials placed by the Sponsoring Authority, the Detaining Authority has passed the impugned detention order with proper application of mind and there is no illegality or infirmity in the detention order and hence, prayed for dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.

¶34

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the records, we find that there is nothing on record to show that Tmt. Santhi, wife of Sivakumar, is taking steps to take out her husband viz., Sivakumar, on bail in the ground case. Therefore, the detention order is vitiated on the ground of non-application of mind.

¶35

In the light of the above discussion, we have no hesitation in

¶36

quashing the order of detention on the ground of non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in passing the impugned detention order.

¶37

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

¶38

Page No.3 of 5

¶39

¶40

HCP(MD)No. 1568 of 2024

¶41

In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of

¶42

detention in P.D.No.58 / 2024 dated 17.11.2024, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Sivakumar, Son of Raja, aged 45 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶43

[A.D.J.C., J.] [R.P., J.] 05.08.2025

¶44

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

¶45

To:

¶46

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

¶47

The District Magistrate and District Collectorate, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶48

3.The Inspector of Police, Pappanadu Police Station, Thanjavur District.

¶49

4.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Trichy.

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

Page No.4 of 5

¶53

HCP(MD)No. 1568 of 2024

¶54

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

¶55

trp

¶56

ORDER MADE IN HCP(MD)No. 1568 of 2024

¶57

DATED : 05.08.2025

¶58

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

¶59

Page No.5 of 5

Santhi v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhi 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

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs Tvl. Jeyaraj Trucks And Buses

Suresh Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Marikkannu Vs The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons and Correctional Services

Gandhi Vs The Inspector General of Prisons

Vinothkumar Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Nattamai @ Natarajan Vs The State of Tamilnadu