Madras High Court
Shanthi vs The Secretary To The Government on 2 January, 2024
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S.Ramesh
H.C.P.No.1895 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.01.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
H.C.P.No.1895 of 2023
Shanthi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Secretary to the Government,
Home Prohibition & Excise Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai 600 009.
2.District Collector and District Magistrate,
Coimbatore,
Coimbatore District.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruppur,
Tiruppur District.
4.The Superintendent,
Central Prison,
Coimbatore.
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.No.1895 of 2023
5.State Rep by:-
The Inspector of Police,
Karumathampatti Police Station,
Coimbatore District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the
records in connection with the order of Detention passed by the second
respondent dated 02.09.2023 in Cr.M.P.No.29/D.O/2023 against the
petitioner husband Sathish @ Venkateshwaran, Son of Eshwaran, who is
confined at Central Prison, Coimbatore and set aside the same and
consequently direct the respondents to produce the detenue before this
Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Saranraj
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor
assisted by
Mr.C.Aravind
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.)
The petitioner, wife of the detenu namely Sathish @ Venkateshwaran,
S/o.Eshwaran, aged 33 years, has come forward with this petition
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
challenging the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent, dated
02.09.2023 slapped on her husband, branding him as "Drug Offender" under
the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber
Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral
Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers and
Video Pirates Act, 1982 [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 pointed out that the bail order relied upon by the
Detaining Authority is not similar to the case on hand, by referring to the
fact that bail was granted to the accused therein mainly on the ground that
the co-accused was granted bail. Therefore, the learned counsel submitted
that the Detaining Authority has not applied his mind while expressing his
subjective satisfaction that the detenu is also likely to be released on bail.
4.On a perusal of the Booklet, this Court finds that, in the similar case
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
relied upon by the Detaining Authority, i.e., Cr.M.P.No.4343 of 2022, dated
27.12.2022, the accused therein was granted bail mainly on the ground that
the co-accused had been granted bail. Hence, this Court is of the view that
the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority that the detenu is also
likely to be released on bail, by relying upon the aforesaid similar case,
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 [5] SCC 244, has dealt with a situation where the Detention Order is
passed without an application of mind. In case, any of the reasons stated in
the order of detention is non-existent or a material information is wrongly
assumed, that will 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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
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 ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in
view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that the detention order
is liable to be quashed.
7.Accordingly, the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent, in
Cr.M.P.No.29/D.O/2023, dated 02.09.2023, is hereby set aside and the
Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu viz., Sathish @
Venkateshwaran, S/o.Eshwaran, aged 33 years, is directed to be set at liberty
forthwith unless he is required in connection with any other case.
[M.S.R., J] [S.M., J]
02.01.2024
pvs
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Secretary to the Government,
Home Prohibition & Excise Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai 600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate,
Coimbatore,
Coimbatore District.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruppur,
Tiruppur District.
4.The Superintendent,
Central Prison,
Coimbatore.
5.The Inspector of Police,
Karumathampatti Police Station,
Coimbatore District.
6.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
pvs
02.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
