Madras High Court
Santhanadevan vs The State Represented By on 24 November, 2025
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
HCP.No.2327 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 24.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
H.C.P.No.2327 of 2025
Santhanadevan ... Petitioner/Brother of the detenu
Versus
1. The State represented by
The Secretary to Government (Home)
Prohibition and Excise Department
Government of Tamil Nadu
Fort St. George
Chennai – 600 009
2. The District Collector / District Magistrate
Villupuram District
Villupuram
3. The Superintendent of Police
Villupuram District
Villupuram
4. The Superintendent of Prison
Central Prison
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:07:17 pm )
HCP.No.2327 of 2025
Cuddalore
5. The Inspector of Police
AWPS Villupuram Police Station
Villupuram District .. Respondents
(Cr.No.77 of 2025)
Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records of
pertaining to the order of detention dated 07.07.2025 passed by the 2nd
respondent in D.O.No.C2/34/2025 and quash the same and produce the
detenu Mr.Santhamoorthi, S/o.Masilamani, aged about 32 years, before this
Honble Court and set him at liberty and the detenu is now confined at
Central Prison, Cuddalore.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Ashokkumar
For Respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
The petitioner, who is the brother of the detenu Santhamoorthy,
S/o.Masilamani, male, aged about 32 years, has come forward with this
petition challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent
dated 07.07.2025 bearing reference Rc.No.C2/34/2025 slapped on his
brother, branding him as "Sexual Offender" under the Tamil Nadu
Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:07:17 pm )
Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand 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 points have been raised in the petitioner, the
learned counsel for the petitioner in the hearing submitted that the detention
order is liable to be quashed on the ground that the Arrest Intimation Form
was not properly translated to Tamil, which prevented the detenu from
making an effective representation.
4. On a perusal of the Booklet, it is seen that Page No.19 of the
booklet furnished to the detenu contains the Arrest Intimation Form, but the
same was not properly translated to Tamil. As the detenu is conversant only
with Tamil, the Detention Order passed by the Detaining Authority is
vitiated.
5. In this context, it is useful to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in 'Powanammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu' reported in
'(1999) 2 SCC 413'. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, after discussing the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:07:17 pm )
safeguards embodied in Article 22 (5) of the Constitution, observed that the
detenu should be afforded an opportunity of making representation
effectively against the Detention Order and that, the failure to supply every
material is imperative. In the said context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
held in Paragraphs 9 and 16 of the said judgment as follows:
“9.However, this Court has maintained a distinction
between a document which has been relied upon by the detaining
authority in the grounds of detention and a document which finds a
mere reference in the grounds of detention. Whereas the non-supply
of a copy of the document relied upon 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 the
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.
But it would not be so where the document merely finds a reference
in the order of detention or among the grounds thereof. In such a
case, the detenue's complaint of non-supply of document has to be
supported by prejudice caused to him in making an effective
representation. What applies to a document would equally apply to
furnishing a translated copy of the document in the language known
to and understood by the detenue, should the document be in a
different language.
..... 16.For the above reasons, in our view, the non-supply
of the Tamil version of the English document, on the facts and in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:07:17 pm )
circumstances, renders her continued detention illegal. We,
therefore, direct that the detenuee be set free forthwith unless she is
required to be detained in any other case. The appeal is accordingly
allowed.”
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. In the result, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the
detention order passed by the second respondent dated 07.07.2025 bearing
reference Rc.No.C2/34/2025 is hereby set aside. The detenu viz.,
Santhamoorthy, S/o.Masilamani,male, aged about 32 years, is directed to be
set at liberty forthwith unless he is required in connection with any other
case.
[N.S.K.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.]
24.11.2025
Index: Yes/No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
gpa
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:07:17 pm )
To
1. The Secretary to Government (Home)
Prohibition and Excise Department
Government of Tamil Nadu
Fort St. George
Chennai – 600 009
2. The District Collector / District Magistrate
Villupuram District
Villupuram
3. The Superintendent of Police
Villupuram District
Villupuram
4. The Superintendent of Prison
Central Prison
Cuddalore
5. The Inspector of Police
AWPS Villupuram Police Station
Villupuram District
6. The Joint Secretary to Government
Public (Law & Order)
Fort Saint George, Chennai – 9
7.The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:07:17 pm )
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.,
AND
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.,
gpa
24.11.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:07:17 pm )
