Padmapriya vs The State Of Tamil Nadu
2023 Latest Caselaw 14677 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 14677 Mad
Judgement Date : 23 November, 2023

Madras High Court

Padmapriya vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 23 November, 2023

Author: S.S.Sundar

Bench: S.S.Sundar

                                                                            HCP.No.1754/2023


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED 23.11.2023

                                                       CORAM

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

                                                        AND

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                                  H.C.P.No.1754/2023

                     Padmapriya                                        ..          Petitioner

                                                        Versus

                     1.The State of Tamil Nadu
                       rep.by its Secretary to Government
                       Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
                       Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

                     2.The District Collector & District Magistrate
                       of Ranipet District, Ranipet.

                     3.The Superintendent of Police
                       Ranipet District, Ranipet.

                     4.The Inspector of Police
                       Sipcot Police Station
                       Ranipet District.

                     5.The Superintendent
                       Central Prison, Vellore.                        ..       Respondents

                                                          1


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                HCP.No.1754/2023


                     Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
                     of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the entire records
                     relating to petitioner's husband detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982
                     vide detention order dated 19.06.2023 on the file of the 2 nd respondent
                     herein made in proceedings B3/D.O/No.20/2023 and quash the same as
                     illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the
                     petitioner's husband namely Surya aged 25 years, son of Raji before this
                     Court and set him at liberty now the petitioner's husband detained at Central
                     Prison, Vellore.

                                   For Petitioner     :     Mr.C.C.Chellappan for
                                                            Mr.M.Mahendran
                                   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 19.06.2023 slapped on her husband, branding him as "Goonda"

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.

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

(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

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 orders of bail in similar case in

Crl.MP.No.1191/2020 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge

No.II, Kancheepuram on 03.07.2020. However, in the Booklet, in

particular, page No.113, 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. 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.

(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

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

[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

whether the case of the co-accused was on the same

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

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.''

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

(6)In view of the aforesaid facts, the detention order passed by the 2nd

respondent dated 14.06.2023 in No.236/BCDFGISSSV/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]
                                                                                    23.11.2023
                     AP
                     Internet: Yes







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





                     To

                     1.The Secretary to Government
                       State of Tamil Nadu