Madras High Court
Megavarthini vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 11 September, 2024
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam, V.Sivagnanam
HCP.No.2088 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.09.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
H.C.P.No.2088 of 2024
Megavarthini ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep by its Secretary to Government,
Home Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.
2. The District Magistrate and District Collector,
Collectorate, Namakkal,
Namakkal District.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police,
Namakkal, Namakkal District.
4. The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Salem 636 007.
5. State, rep by the Inspector of Police,
Molasi Police Station,
Namakkal District.
(Crime No.62 of 2024) ... Respondents
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
HCP.No.2088 of 2024
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a
Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records leading to the detention of
petitioner's husband the detenu Thiru.Chinnathambi @ Rangasamy, aged 31
years, son of Rangappa Naicker, 4/4-3 Akkamapalayam, Andipalayam
Emapallipost, Tiruchengode Taluk, Namakkal District, presently detained in
Central Prison, Salem under Act 14/1982, branded as Goonda vide the detention
order dated 08.07.2024, in C.M.P.No.36/ Goonda / 2024 (M1) on the file of the
2nd Respondent herein directing to produce the person of body of the detenu
before this Court and thereafter set him at liberty from the Central Prison, Salem.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Vasudevan
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
The order of detention passed by the second respondent in C.M.P.No.36/
Goonda / 2024 (M1), dated 08.07.2024, is sought to be quashed in the present
Habeas Corpus Petition.
2.Translation of Form 59 issued under Section 167 Cr.P.C. was improperly
done. Since the said document has not been translated and furnished to the detenu
in the language known to him, the detenu is deprived of submitting an effective
representation, which is a valuable right provided to the detenu under Act 14 of
1982.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3.The issue regarding serving of translated version of the documents in the
preventive detention order has been dealt with by the Three Judges Bench of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Powanammal Vs. The State of
Tamil Nadu and others reported in 1999 2 SCC 413. The Apex Court held that
non supply of the copy of the documents relied on in the grounds of detention has
been held to be fatal to continued detention, the detenue need not show that any
prejudice is caused to him. This is because non- supply of such a document would
amount to denial of the right of being communicated the grounds and of being
afforded the opportunity of making an effective representation against the order.
The Court further reiterated that what applies to a document, would equally apply
to furnishing translated copy of the document in the language known to and
understood by the detenu, should the document be in a different language. The
Apex Court had not made any distinction between non serving of a document and
the translated copy of the document in the known language of the detenu.
4.In view of the said judgment of the Apex Court, the present Habeas
Corpus Petition has to be considered. Consequently, the impugned order of
detention in C.M.P.No.36/ Goonda / 2024 (M1), dated 08.07.2024, is quashed and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the Habeas Corpus Petition stands allowed. The detenue,
namely,Thiru.Chinnathambi @ Rangasamy, aged 31 years, son of Rangappa
Naicker, now confined in Central Prison, Salem, is directed to be set at liberty
forthwith unless he is otherwise required in connection with any other case.
[S.M.S., J.] [V.S.G., J.]
sli 11.09.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
To
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep by its Secretary to Government,
Home Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.
2. The District Magistrate and District Collector,
Collectorate, Namakkal,
Namakkal District.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police,
Namakkal, Namakkal District.
4. The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Salem 636 007.
5. State, rep by the Inspector of Police,
Molasi Police Station,
Namakkal District.
(Crime No.62 of 2024)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
sli
6. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
11.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
