Mahalakshmi Vs The Secretary to the Government

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records in connection with the order of Detention passed by the second respondent dated 13.11.2025 in C.M.P.No.93/Goonda/2025 (M1) against the petitioner Son Dineshkumar, male aged 25 years, S/o.Muthusamy, who is confined at Central Prison, Salem and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenue before the Court and set him at liberty.

¶24

For Petitioner:	M/s.D.Balaji
For Respondents:	Mr.C.R.Malarvannan
	Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu
	(Criminal Side)

¶25

ORDER

¶26

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

¶27

The mother of the detenu – Dineshkumar, aged 25 years, S/o.Muthusamy, has filed this petition challenging the detention order dated 13.11.2025, branding him as ‘Goonda’ under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act, 1982 (Act 14/1982).

¶28

__________ Page2 of 6

¶29

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

¶30

2026:MHC:2620

¶31

HCP No. 2566 of 2025

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu for the respondents.

¶33

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

¶34

that the detention order is liable to be quashed on the ground that the satisfaction of the detaining authority as regards the real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail suffers from non-application of mind.

¶35

It is seen from the grounds of detention that the detaining authority has stated that the detenu has not moved any bail application. However, he has also stated that there is real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail by filing appropriate bail application. Admittedly, there was no material placed before the detaining authority that the detenu or his relatives were taking steps to file a bail application. In such circumstances, inference of the detaining authority that the detenu is likely to file a bail application and come out on bail is his mere ipse dixit . Since the satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority is without basis, the conclusion that the detenu would indulge in further criminal

¶36

__________ Page3 of 6

¶37

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

¶38

2026:MHC:2620

¶39

HCP No. 2566 of 2025

¶40

activities, is vitiated. For the aforesaid reason, the detention order is liable to be quashed.

¶41

In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in C.M.P.No.93/Goonda/2025 (M1) dated 13.11.2025, is set aside.

¶42

The detenu, viz., Dineshkumar, aged 25 years, S/o.Muthusamy, who is now confined in Central Prison, Salem, is hereby directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any

¶43

other case.

¶44

(A.S.M.,J.) (S.M.,J.) 08-07-2026

¶45

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

¶46

Note: Issue order copy today.

¶47

dk

¶48

__________ Page4 of 6