Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Kavibharathi vs The Secretary To The Government
2023 Latest Caselaw 15537 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 15537 Mad
Judgement Date : 1 December, 2023

Madras High Court

Kavibharathi vs The Secretary To The Government on 1 December, 2023

Author: S.S.Sundar

Bench: S.S.Sundar

                                                                                  HCP.No.1516/2023


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED 01.12.2023

                                                      CORAM

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

                                                       AND

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                                H.C.P.No.1516/2023

                      Kavibharathi                                           ..          Petitioner

                                                       Versus

                     1.The Secretary to the Government
                       Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
                       Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

                     2.The Commissioner of Police
                       Salem City,

                     3.The Superintendent of Prison
                       Central Prison, Salem-7.

                     4.The Inspector of Police
                       Kondalampatty Police Station
                       Salem City.                                           ..       Respondents

                     Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
                     of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for the records in connection

                                                          1


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                    HCP.No.1516/2023


                     with the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent dated 10.07.2023 in
                     CMP.No.64/Drug Offender/Salem City/2023 against the petitioner husband
                     Palaniyandi @ Beema @ Bharathi, male, aged 26 years, son of
                     Rameswaran, who is confined at Central Prison, Vellore and set aside the
                     same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and
                     set him at liberty.

                                   For Petitioner  :          Mr.D.Balaji
                                   For Respondents :          Mr.E.Raj Thilak
                                                              Additional Public Prosecutor
                                                              assisted by Mr.Aravind.C

                                                         ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.]

(1)The petitioner, wife of the detenu herein, has come forward with this

petition challenging the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent

dated 10.07.2023 slapped on her husband, branding her as "Drug

Offender" under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

(2)Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

(3)Though several grounds are raised in the petition, the learned counsel for

the petitioner contended that the bail order in the similar case relied on by

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

the Detaining Authority to arrive at the subjective satisfaction that the

detenu is likely to be released on bail, was obtained during COVID-19

situation and that placing reliance on such order shows the non-

application of mind on the part of the Detaining Authority.

(4)On a perusal of the Grounds of Detention, it is seen that the Detaining

Authority had relied upon the order of bail in similar case in

CMP.No.323/2020 passed by the learned Special Judge for EC Act

Cases, Salem. However, in the Booklet, in particular, page No.102, it is

seen that the bail order in the similar case was obtained during COVID-

19 situation and bail was granted to the accused therein with a specific

reference to COVID-19. Further, this Court finds that the said order

relates to release of the accused persons therein on statutory bail

u/s.167[2] of Cr.P.C., since the accused therein had been in prison for

more than 90 days and not on merits. It is in the said circumstances, this

Court finds that the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the Detaining

Authority to hold that the detenu is likely to be released on bail, suffers

from non-application of mind.

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

(5)The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Rekha Vs. State of Tamil

Nadu through Secretary to Government and Another reported in 2011

[5] SCC 244, has considered a case where it is stated that in the grounds

of detention that relatives of detenu are taking action to take him on bail

in the criminal case in which the detenu was in remand and that in similar

case, bail was granted by Courts. Since no details had been given about

the alleged similar cases in which bail was allegedly granted by the Court

concerned, it is held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that in the absence of

details, the statement which is mere ipse dixit, cannot be relied upon and

that itself is sufficient to vitiate the detention order. When the subjective

satisfaction was irrational or there was non-application of mind, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the order of detention is liable to be

quashed. It is relevant to extract paragraphs No.10 and 11 of the said

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court:-

''10. In our opinion, if details are given by the respondent authority about the alleged bail orders in similar cases mentioning the date of the orders, the bail application number, whether the bail order was passed in respect of the co-accused in the same case, and

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

whether the case of the co-accused was on the same footing as the case of the petitioner, then, of course, it could be argued that there is likelihood of the accused being released on bail, because it is the normal practice of most courts that if a co-accused has been granted bail and his case is on the same footing as that of the petitioner, then the petitioner is ordinarily granted bail. However, the respondent authority should have given details about the alleged bail order in similar cases, which has not been done in the present case. A mere ipse dixit statement in the grounds of detention cannot sustain the detention order and has to be ignored.

11. In our opinion, the detention order in question only contains ipse dixit regarding the alleged imminent possibility of the accused coming out on bail and there was no reliable material to this effect. Hence, the detention order in question cannot be sustained.''

(6)In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

aforesaid judgment and in view aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view

that the detention order is liable to be quashed.

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

(7)Accordingly, the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent dated

10.07.2023 in CMP.No.62/Drug Offender/Salem City/2023, is hereby set

aside and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu is directed

to be set at liberty forthwith unless he is required in connection with any

other case.

                                                                             [SSSRJ]      [SM J]
                                                                                   01.12.2023
                     AP
                     Internet: Yes







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





                     To

                     1.The Secretary to the Government

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of Police Salem City,

3.The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison, Salem-7.

4.The Inspector of Police Kondalampatty Police Station Salem City.

5.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

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

S.S.SUNDAR, J., AND SUNDER MOHAN, J.,

AP

01.12.2023

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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter