Allowed

Ramar alias Jeyaramar v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC8 Dec 2025HCP(MD)/861/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Habeas corpus petition challenging a Goonda preventive detention order under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The detention order dated 04/02/2025 was sent to the Government for approval only on 07/02/2025, a delay of three days contrary to Section 3(3). The Court quashed the detention and directed the detenu's release.

What did the court decide?

Detention order dated 04/02/2025 set aside; detenu Ramar alias Jeyaramar directed to be released forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.

Ramar alias Jeyaramar Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

HCP(MD)No.861 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated: 08/12/2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

¶6

HCP(MD)No.861 of 2025

¶7

Ramar alias Jeyaramar : Petitioner/Detenu

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶10

2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City, Tirunelveli.

¶11

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Palayamkottai Central Prison, Tirunelveli District. : Respondents

¶12

Prayer:- This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the entire records connected with the detention order of the respondent No.2 in No.12/BCDFGISSSV/2025, dated 04/02/2025 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu by name Ramar alias Jeyakumar, son of Chelladurai, aged about 30 years, now detained as

¶13

1/5

¶14

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

¶15

HCP(MD)No.861 of 2025

¶16

“Goonda” at Palayamkottai Central Prison before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith and pass such further or other orders.

¶17

For Petitioner : Dr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN.J. )

¶20

The petitioner is the detenu viz., Ramar alias Jeyaramar, aged about 30 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in No.12/BCDFGISSSV/2025, dated 04/02/2025 holding him to be a “Goonda” as contemplated under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this habeas corpus petition.

¶21

2.We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶22

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

¶23

2/5

¶24

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

¶25

HCP(MD)No.861 of 2025

¶26

3.The detenu was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

¶27

22/01/2025 in Crime No.25 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Thatchanallur Police Station for the offences under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 308(4) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and thereafter, the Investigating Officer recommended the detenu/accused for detaining him under Act 14 of 1982 and accordingly, the Detaining Authority detained the detenu under Act 14 of 1982, by the impugned order, dated 04/02/2025.

¶28

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner raised a specific ground

¶29

that the order of detention was passed on 04/02/2025, however, it was sent to the Government for approval only on 07/02/2025.

¶30

5.Section 3(3) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 says that the Detaining Authority shall forthwith report the detention order to the State Government together with the grounds and other necessary documents.

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

HCP(MD)No.861 of 2025

¶34

6.In the case on hand, there was a delay of 3 days in sending the

¶35

detention order for approval to the State Government. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner raised so many grounds, on the sole ground of delay, the detention order cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be quashed.

¶36

7.In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order

¶37

of detention passed by the second respondent, dated 04/02/2025 is set aside. The detenu viz., Ramar alias Jeyaramar, S/o.Celladurai, aged about 30 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶38

(G.K.I., J.) (R.P., J.) 08-12-2025

¶39

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er

¶40

4/5

¶41

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

¶42

HCP(MD)No.861 of 2025

¶43

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J and R.POORNIMA,J