Muruganandham Vs State of Tamilnadu, Rep.by The Secretary

Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records relating to the detention order No.B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V. No.13/2025, order dated 12.07.2025 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and direct

¶20

Page No.1 / 5

¶21

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

¶22

H.C.P. No.1999 of 2025

¶23

the respondents to produce the detenue Akash, son of Muruganandham, aged about 19 years, now confined at Central Prison, Puzhal at Chennai and set him at liberty.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Arul For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(The Order of the Court was made by P.Velmurugan, J)

¶27

This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the detention order No.B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V. No.13/2025 dated 12.07.2025 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu Akash S/o.Muruganandham, aged about 19 years, now confined at Central Prison, Puzhal at Chennai and set him at liberty.

¶28

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner took several grounds to quash the impugned order of detention, he focused mainly on the ground of non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in passing the order of detention while arriving at the subjective satisfaction under which the detenu has been detained in the

¶29

ground case, which has adversely affected the detenu’s right of making an effective representation. He would submit that the Section of offence has not been properly mentioned in the detention order. Further, in the English version of the bail petition filed by the accused in the similar case referred to by the detaining authority, the date is

¶30

Page No.2 / 5

¶31

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

¶32

H.C.P. No.1999 of 2025

¶33

mentioned as 30^th June 2020, whereas in the Tamil version it is mentioned as 30.06.2021.

¶34

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that due to motive rival

¶35

groups attacked each other, in which one person died and since the detenu involved in the serious crime, the detention order was passed.

¶36

A reading of the materials and the order passed by the detaining authority shows

¶37

non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in passing the order of detention and thereby, prevented the detenu from giving effective representation. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash the detention order.

¶38

Accordingly, the order of detention passed in No.B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V. No.13/2025 dated 12.07.2025 by the second respondent against the detenu Akash aged about 19 years S/o.Muruganandham,, is hereby quashed.

¶39