Jayanthi Vs State or Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Additional chief Secretary to Government

Prayer: Habeas Corpus petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus or any other Writ of direction calling for the records relating to the detention or der in Memo

¶19

Page1 of 5

¶20

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

¶21

HCP No. 2124 of 2025

¶22

No.527/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025, dated 31.07.2025 passed by the 2^nd respondent under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the petitioner’s son VIJAYAN S/O Poongavanam, aged about 27 years the detenue, now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai before this Hon’ble Court and set him at liberty and pass such further or appropriate order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case and thus render Justice.

¶23

For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.Selvakumar for Mr.A.Vinoth Kumar

¶24

For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Raja Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor Assisted By Mr. M. Sylvester John Order

¶25

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

¶26

The mother of the detenu-Vijayan, branded as ‘Goonda’ under Section

¶27

2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, has filed this petition challenging the detention order dated 19.08.2025.

¶28

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

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail suffers from non-application of mind, as the facts in the case relied upon by him to arrive at such a conclusion is not similar to the facts in the present case.

¶30

__________ Page2 of 5

¶31

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

¶32

HCP No. 2124 of 2025

¶33

We have perused the order passed in similar case in Cr.M.P.No.26094

¶34

of 2024 dated 19.11.2024, which has been relied upon by the detaining authority to hold that the detenu is likely to be released on bail. In the said case,

¶35

the accused had only one previous case, whereas, in the present case, the detenu has two adverse cases and there is one more case registered against him even according to the respondents. Therefore, the reliance placed upon the aforesaid order by the detaining authority to arrive at such a satisfaction is misconceived, which vitiates the detention order.

¶36

5.In light of the above discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in No.527/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025, dated 31.07.2025 is set aside.

¶37

6.The detenu, viz., Vijayan, S/o.Poongavanam, aged 27 years, now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.

¶38

(A.S.M.,J.) (S.M.,J.) 26-03-2026

¶39

sl

¶40

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

¶41

Note: Registry is directed to issue a copy of this order today. (i.e., 26.03.2026)

¶42

__________ Page3 of 5

¶43

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