Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

R.Sarath Kumar vs Home
2025 Latest Caselaw 2368 Mad

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2368 Mad
Judgement Date : 3 February, 2025

Madras High Court

R.Sarath Kumar vs Home on 3 February, 2025

Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S. Ramesh
                                                                                 HCP.No.108 of 2025

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 03.02.2025

                                                       CORAM :

                                    THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
                                                           AND
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR

                                                 H.C.P.No.108 of 2025

                     R.Sarath Kumar
                     S/o Ravi, D.No.G2, No.6, 6th Street, Ram Nagar,
                     Nanganallur, Chennai.
                                                                Petitioner(s)/son of the detenue
                                                           Vs
                     1.Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
                     Secretary To Government, Home, Prohibition And
                     Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George,
                     Chennai.

                     2. The District Collector
                     The District Magistrate,
                     Chengalpattu District.

                     3. The Superintendent Of Police
                     Hospital Road,
                     Bypass Road,
                     Chengalpattu.

                     4. The Additional Superintendent
                     Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai.
                     5. The Inspector Of Police
                     Cum Sponsoring Authority,
                     Mathuranthagam Police Station,
                     Chengalpattu.
                                                                                 Respondent(s)

                     Page 1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                         HCP.No.108 of 2025



                     PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
                     issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, to produce the petitioners father, Ravi
                     S/o.Seenuvasan           aged 60 years who is detained in 4th respondent/The
                     Additional Superintendent Central Prison II Puzhal Chennai before this
                     Honble Court and set him at liberty forthwith by calling for the records
                     pursuant to the detention order in CPT NO.22 of 2024 dated 10.12.2024 on
                     the file of the 2nd respondent herein and quash the same.

                                        For Petitioner            : Mr.K.Anandharaj
                                        For Respondents           : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj
                                                                    Additional Public Prosecutor
                                                                    assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John

                                                             ORDER

M.S.RAMESH, J.

and N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

The petitioner herein, who is the son of the detenu, Ravi

S/o.Seenuvasan, aged 60 years, has come forward with this petition

challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent dated

10.12.2024 slapped on his father, 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, as well as the learned

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

Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

3. Though several grounds are raised in the petition, the learned

counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is an inordinate delay in

passing the order of detention.

4. In the instant case, the detenu was arrested on 09.11.2024 and

thereafter, the detention order came to be passed on 10.12.2024. This fact is

not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

5. In the case of 'Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura',

reported in '2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813', when there was an inordinate delay

from the date of proposal till passing of the detention order and likewise,

between the date of detention order and the actual arrest, the Hon'ble

Supreme Court had held that the live and proximate link, between the

grounds and the purpose of detention, stands snapped in arresting the detenu.

The relevant observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is extracted

hereunder:-

“20. It is manifestly clear from a conspectus of the above

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

decisions of this Court, that the underlying principle is that if there is unreasonable delay between the date of the order of detention & actual arrest of the detenu and in the same manner from the date of the proposal and passing of the order of detention, such delay unless satisfactorily explained throws a considerable doubt on the genuineness of the requisite subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority in passing the detention order and consequently render the detention order bad and invalid because the “live and proximate link” between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention is snapped in arresting the detenu. A question whether the delay is unreasonable and stands unexplained depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.”

6. Drawing inspiration from the judgment in Sushanta Kumar

Banik's case, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of 'Gomathi Vs.

Principal Secretary to Government and Others', reported in '2023 SCC

OnLine Mad 6332', had held that when there is an inordinate delay from the

date of arrest/date of proposal till the order of detention, the live and

proximate link between them would also stand snapped and thereby, had

quashed the detention order on this ground.

7. In yet another case i.e., in 'Nagaraj Vs. State of Tamil Nadu',

reported in '(2018) 3 MWN (Cri) 428', this Court had held that the delay of

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

36 days in passing the detention order after the arrest of the detenu would

snap the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of

detention. Hence, in view of the unexplained and inordinate delay in

passing the order of detention, after the arrest of the detenu, the detention

order in the present case, is liable to be quashed.

8. Accordingly, the detention order passed by the second respondent

on 10.12.2024 in CPT NO.22 of 2024, is hereby set aside and the Habeas

Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu viz.,Ravi S/o.Seenuvasan aged 60

years, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his confinement is

required in connection with any other case.

                                                                      [M.S.R., J]       [N.S., J]
                                                                               03.02.2025
                     Index: Yes/No
                     Speaking/Non-speaking order
                     Internet: Yes/No
                     Neutral Citation: Yes/No
                     Anu






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


                                                                            M.S.RAMESH, J.
                                                                                      and
                                                                       N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.
                                                                                     Anu
                     To

1.Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretary To Government, Home, Prohibition And Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai.

2. The District Collector The District Magistrate, Chengalpattu District.

3. The Superintendent Of Police Hospital Road, Bypass Road, Chengalpattu.

4. The Additional Superintendent Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai.

5. The Inspector Of Police Cum Sponsoring Authority, Mathuranthagam Police Station, Chengalpattu.

6.The Joint Secretary, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai

7.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

03.02.2025

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