Devi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep by the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government

The State of Tamil Nadu Rep By The Additional Chief Secretary To The Government, (Home) Prohibition and Excise(XVI) Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

¶13

The Commissioner Of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai.

¶14

The Superintendent Of Prison Central Prison at Puzhal, Chennai.

¶15

The Inspector Of Police P-1, Pulianthope Police Station, Chennai.

¶16

..Respondent(s)

¶17

Prayer: Habeas corpus petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus or any other appropriate Writ, or order, or direction, in the nature of the writ, to call for the records relating to the detention order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the second respondent in NO.693/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025 dated 15.09.2025 on the file of the 2nd respondent and set aside the same

¶18

Page1 of 6

¶19

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

¶20

HCP No. 2095 of 2025

¶21

and direct the respondents herein to produce the husband of the petitioner/detenu Mr. Silambarasan, S/o. Venkatesan, aged 38 years now confined in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

¶22

For Petitioner(s):	Ms.R.Subadra Devi
For Respondent(s):	Mr. R. Muniyapparaj, Additional Public Prosecutor
	Assisted By Mr. M. Sylvester John

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(Order of the Court was made by Sunder Mohan, J.)

¶25

The wife of detenu - Silambarasan, S/o. Venkatesan, aged 38

¶26

years, has filed this petition challenging the detention order dated 15.09.2025, branding him as a ‘Drug Offender’ under Section 2(e) of the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act, 1982 (Act 14/1982).

¶27

We have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents.

¶28

Though several grounds have been raised, we are of the view

¶29

that the detention order is liable to be quashed on the ground that the

¶30

Page2 of 6

¶31

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

¶32

HCP No. 2095 of 2025

¶33

satisfaction of the detaining authority as regards the real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail suffers from non-application of mind.

¶34

In the grounds of detention, the detaining authority has stated that the detenu had filed the bail application in Crl.MP.No.5875 of 2025 before the Principal Special Court for EC & NDPS Cases, Chennai and the same is pending; that his relatives are taking steps to take him out on bail; and that in a similar case, bail was granted by the Principal Special Court for EC & NDPS Cases, Chennai in Crl.MP.No.1414 of 2021 on 04.06.2021.

¶35

5.The detaining authority ought to have seen whether the facts in

¶36

the bail order relied upon by him was comparable to the facts of the instant case. In the order relied upon by the detaining authority, the accused therein was granted bail because he had no previous cases, whereas, in this case, the detenu has two adverse cases. Therefore, the reliance placed by the detaining authority on the said order, vitiates his subjective satisfaction as regards the possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. Hence, the detention order is liable to be quashed.

¶37

Page3 of 6

¶38

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

¶39

HCP No. 2095 of 2025

¶40

In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition

¶41

is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in

¶42

NO.693/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025 dated 15.09.2025, is set aside.

¶43

The detenu, viz., Silambarasan, S/o. Venkatesan, aged 38 years, who is now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, is hereby directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.

¶44

(A.S.M.,J.) (S.M.,J.) 29-04-2026

¶45

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶46

Note to Registry: Issue today.

¶47

ars

¶48

__________ Page4 of 6

¶49

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