Allowed¶37

Latha v. the Secretary to the Government

Madras HC6 Jan 2026HCP/2108/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court habeas corpus petition (H.C.P. No.2108 of 2025, decided 06.01.2026) under Article 226; preventive detention order BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025 dated 25.06.2025 by Commissioner of Police, Tambaram against R.Vishal quashed because pages of the booklet issued to the petitioner were illegible, impairing the detenue's effective representation; ancillary arguments: wrong police station named in ground case (Medavakkam bifurcated as Pallikaranai) and two adverse cases including robbery; detenu set at liberty forthwith unless required elsewhere; bench P.Velmurugan and M.Jothiraman.

What did the court decide?

Detention order dated 25.06.2025 in BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025 quashed; detenu R.Vishal directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case. ¶37

Latha Vs the Secretary to the Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Detention order dated 25.06.2025 in BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025 quashed; detenu R.Vishal directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the detention order is liable to be quashed on the ground that the police station was wrongly mentioned in the ground case. +1 more

¶29

Ratio / Principle

On a perusal of the materials, this Court found that some of the pages in the booklet issued to the petitioner are not legible, and was therefore inclined to quash the detention order passed against the detenu.

¶34

Key takeaways

The order of detention dated 25.06.2025 in BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025 passed by the second respondent against the detenu R.Vishal, aged 27 years, S/o.Raja, is hereby quashed.ratio¶35
The detenu R.Vishal S/o.Raja is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless he is required in connection with any other case.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Habeas Corpus Petition (H.C.P. No.2108 of 2025) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Latha challenging the detention order dated 25.06.2025 in BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Tambaram (second respondent) against her husband R.Vishal (27 years), confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. Counsel for the petitioner mainly urged that the police station was wrongly mentioned in the ground case and that some pages of the booklet issued to the petitioner were not legible, adversely affecting the detenue's right of making an effective representation. The Additional Public Prosecutor responded that Medavakkam police station had been bifurcated as Pallikaranai and that the detenu figured in two adverse cases, one being robbery. On a perusal of the materials, the Court found the booklet pages illegible and quashed the detention order; the detenu was directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case. Petition allowed. (Coram: P.Velmurugan and M.Jothiraman, JJ.; order made by P.Velmurugan, J.)

¶1

H.C.P. No.2108 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated: 06.01.2026

¶4

Coram:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶8

H.C.P. No.2108 of 2025

¶9

Latha .. Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

State Rep. by

¶12

Secretary to Government

¶13

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Government of Tamil Nadu

¶14

Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009

¶15

The Commissioner of Police

¶16

Office of the Commissioner of Police Tambaram

¶17

The Superintendent Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai

¶18

The Inspector of Police T-22 Medavakkam Police Station

¶19

Chennai .. Respondents

¶20

Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records in connection with the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 25.06.2025 in BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025, on the file of the second respondent herein against the petitioner’s husband R.Vishal, age 27 years S/o.Raja, who

¶21

Page No.1 / 5

¶22

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

¶23

H.C.P. No.2108 of 2025

¶24

is confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and set aside the detention order and direct the respondents to produce him before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶25

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

¶26

ORDER

¶27

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

¶28

This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records in connection with the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 25.06.2025 in BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025, on the file of the second respondent herein against the petitioner’s husband R.Vishal, age 27 years S/o.Raja, who is confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and set aside the detention order and direct the respondents to produce him before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶29

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner took several grounds to quash the impugned order of detention, he focused mainly on the ground that in the ground case, they have wrongly mentioned the police station. He further submitted that some of the pages in the booklet issued to the petitioner, was not legible and the same adversely affected the detenue’s right of making an effective representation. Owing to the same, the detenue could not make his representation. Therefore, the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed.

¶30

Page No.2 / 5

¶31

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

¶32

H.C.P. No.2108 of 2025

¶33

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that earlier it was Medavakkam and subsequently it was bifurcated as Pallikaranai and the police station mentioned in the detention order, is the subsequent development. He further submitted that the detenu involved in two adverse cases and one of the cases is robbery.

¶34

A perusal of materials shows that some of the pages in the booklet issued to the petitioner are not legible. Hence, this Court is inclined to quash the detention order passed against the detenu.

¶35

Accordingly, the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 25.06.2025 in BCDFGISSSV No.71 of 2025, on the file of the second respondent herein, against the detenu R.Vishal, age 27 years S/o.Raja, is hereby quashed.

¶36