Allowed

Boopathi v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC24 Mar 2026HCP(MD)/205/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mother challenged preventive detention order against her son under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, contending the detaining authority relied on an unrelated bail order to infer likelihood of release. The Court found the relied-upon order pertained to a dissimilar solitary murder case and set aside the detention for non-application of mind.

What did the court decide?

Detention order in P.D.O.No.31 of 2025 dated 15.08.2025 set aside; detenu Thiru Kalayarasan directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.

Boopathi Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED: 24.03.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶7

H.C.P.(MD)No.205 of 2026

¶8

Boopathi

¶9

.. Petitioner / mother of the

¶10

detenu

¶11

Vs.

¶12

1.Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by its

¶13

The Additional Chief Secretary to Government,

¶14

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat Chennai.

¶15

2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Pudukkottai District.

¶16

3.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District.

¶17

4.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Trichirappalli.

¶18

5.The Inspector of Police, Alangudi Police Station, Pudukkottai District. .. Respondents

¶19

Page 1 of 6

¶20

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

¶21

Prayer :Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records, connected with the detention order of the second respondent in P.D.O.No.31 of 2025, dated 15.08.2025 on the file of the second respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to produce the person of the petitioner's son, Thiru Kalayarasan, aged 27 years, S/o. Karunanithi, confined in Central Prison, Trichirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Padmanabhan For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(Order of the Court was made by N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.)

¶25

The petitioner is the mother of the detenu, by name, Thiru Kalayarasan, aged 27 years, S/o. Karunanithi. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in P.D.O.No.31 of 2025, dated 15.08.2025 holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2 (f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶26

Page 2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

¶29

Apart from the other grounds that were raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, one of the main ground that was raised is that the Detaining Authority was aware of the fact that no bail petition was filed by the detenu and in spite of the same, the Detaining Authority took into consideration the order that was passed in Crl.M.P.No.2136 of 2023, dated 03.06.2023 and had come to a conclusion that bail has been granted in the similar case and therefore, there is likelihood of the detenu being let out on bail. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the order that was relied upon by the Detaining Authority does not pertain to a similar case.

¶30

We have carefully gone through the order passed in Crl.M.P.No. 2138 of 2023 dated 03.06.2023. On going through the order, it is seen that it was a solitary case of murder and the concerned Court had taken into consideration the fact that the accused therein had suffered incarceration for

¶31

Page 3 of 6

¶32

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

¶33

more than 85 days and the investigation was completed and the police report

¶34

has also been filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶35

In the case on hand, there was a previous antecedent for the detenu, since one adverse case has been taken note of by the Detaining Authority. The order passed in Crl.M.P.No.2138 of 2023 dated 03.06.2023 that was relied upon by the Detaining Authority is certainly not a similar case and hence, the detention order suffers from non-application of mind.

¶36

In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in P.D.O.No.31 of 2025, dated 15.08.2025 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Thiru Kalayarasan, aged 27 years, S/o. Karunanithi, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.

¶37

(N.A.V.,J..) (K.K.R.K.,J.,) 24.03.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No TSG

¶38

Page 4 of 6

¶39

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

¶40

¶41

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat Chennai.

¶42

2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Pudukkottai District.

¶43

3.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District.

¶44

4.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Trichirappalli.

¶45

5.The Inspector of Police, Alangudi Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

¶46

6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶47

Page 5 of 6

¶48

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

¶49

N. ANAND VENKATESH,J. AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.

¶50

TSG

¶51

H.C.P.(MD)No.205 of 2026

¶52

24.03.2026

¶53

Page 6 of 6

¶54

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

Boopathi v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Boopathi v. The State of Tamilnadu

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

R.Gopala Rao Vs The State of Tamilnadu, rep by its The Additional Chief Secretary to Government

Kalanjiyam Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Johnson Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Manikandan @ Mental Mani Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Muthupandi Vs The Inspector of Police

P.Venkadesh Vs The State of Tamilnadu