Allowed

Dhilliyammal v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Madras HC11 Feb 2026HCP/2098/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This HC.P. challenges a detention order branding the detenu as a 'Goonda' under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The Court granted relief due to the illegibility of the List of Property sent to the Magistrate, which prevented the detenu from making an effective representation. The detention order was set aside and the detenu released.

What did the court decide?

The detention order passed by the second respondent dated 08.07.2025 is set aside. The detenu R.Karthikeyan is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required for any other cas

Dhilliyammal Vs The Principal Secretary to… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

HCP.No.2098 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 11.02.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶7

H.C.P.No.2098 of 2025

¶8

Dhilliyammal

¶9

... Petitioner/ Mother of the detenu

¶10

Versus

¶11

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

¶12

The Commissioner of Police, Tambaram City.

¶13

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 66.

¶14

The Inspector of Police, Law & Order, T-22, Medavakkam Police Station, Chennai.

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records relating

¶17

¶18

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

¶19

HCP.No.2098 of 2025 to the detention order passed by the second respondent pertaining to the order made in B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V.No.79/2025 dated 08.07.2025 in detain the detenue under 2 (f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, as a GOONDA and quash the same and direct the respondent to produce the detenu R.Karthikeyan, S/o.Ramesh, aged about 33 years, who is detained at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Nirmal Krishnan For Respondents : Mr.R.Munniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN J.)

¶23

The petitioner, who is the mother of the detenu R.Karthikeyan, S/o.Ramesh, aged about 33 years, has come forward with this petition challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 08.07.2025 in B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V.No.79/2025, slapped on her son R.Karthikeyan, now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, branding him as "Goonda" under 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 [Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982].

¶24

¶25

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

¶26

HCP.No.2098 of 2025

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶28

3. Though several grounds have been raised in the habeas corpus petition assailing the order of detention, the learned counsel for the petitioner mainly focussed his arguments on the ground that the copy of the List of Property sent to Magistrate under Form No.91, found at Page No.151 in Volume-II of the booklet supplied to the detenu, is illegible, which prevented the detenu from making an effective representation against the impugned order of detention. Hence, he contended that the order of detention stands vitiated and is liable to be quashed.

¶29

4. The aforesaid submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has not been disputed by learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶30

On a perusal of the Booklet supplied to the detenu, it is seen that Page No.151 in Volume-II, containing the copy of List of Property sent to Magistrate under Form No.91, is illegible. As such, we find that the

¶31

¶32

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

¶33

HCP.No.2098 of 2025 furnishing of the illegible copies would prejudice the detenu in making an effective representation against the impugned order of detention dated 08.07.2025.

¶34

In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that the detention order is liable to be quashed on these grounds.

¶35

In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the detention order passed by the second respondent in

¶36

B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V.No.79/2025 dated 08.07.2025 is hereby set aside. The detenu, viz.,R.Karthikeyan, S/o.Ramesh, aged about 33 years, who is now confined in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, is hereby directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any

¶37

other case.

¶38

[P.V.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.] 11.02.2026

¶39

Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No ms

¶40

¶41

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

¶42

HCP.No.2098 of 2025

¶43

¶44

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

¶45

The Commissioner of Police, Tambaram City.

¶46

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 66.

¶47

The Inspector of Police, Law & Order, T-22, Medavakkam Police Station, Chennai.

¶48

5.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

¶49

¶50

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

¶51

HCP.No.2098 of 2025 P.VELMURUGAN, J., AND

¶52

M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.,

¶53

¶54

H.C.P.No.2098 of 2025

¶55

11.02.2026 (1/2)

¶56

¶57

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

Dhilliyammal v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhilliyammal v. The Principal Secretary to Government

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

Kupputhai Vs The State rep.by its, The Deputy Inspector General of Prison

B.Selvi Vs The State Rep. by Secretary to the Government

S.Mohan Vs the State Rep by Its, the Secretary to Government

Tvl. J.v.Traders Vs The State Tax officer

D.Chandrasekaran Vs Mrs. J.Flora

E.Ravi @ v.S.Ravi @ Vyasai Ravi Vs State Rep. by