Madras High Court
A.Moses vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 30 October, 2025
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
H.C.P.No.1764 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
H.C.P.No.1764 of 2025
A.Moses ...Petitioner/Detenue's brother
-vs-
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The District Collector cum District Magistrate,
Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Cuddalore District.
4. The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Cuddalore.
5. The Inspector of Police
Railway Police Station, Cuddalore. ... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue
a writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records of the detention made in
C3/D.O./90/2025 under section 2(f) of the Tamilnadu Act 14/1982 branding
him as a Goonda dated 07.07.2025 passed by the 2nd Respondent and set
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2025 03:37:25 pm )
H.C.P.No.1764 of 2025
aside the same and direct the Respondents to produce the detenu before this
Hon`ble Court now confined in Central Prison Cuddalore and set the
detenu Thiru.A.Solomon son of Ambrose aged about 25 years at liberty
forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Gopalakrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
Addl. Public Prosecutor
*****
ORDER
The petitioner herein, who is the brother of the detenue,
namely, A.Solomon, S/o.Ambrose aged about 25 years, detained at Central
Prison, Cuddalore, has come forward with this petition, challenging the
detention order dated 07.07.2025, passed by the second respondent in
C3/D.O./90/2025, branding him as a "Goonda", as contemplated under
Section 2(f) of 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2025 03:37:25 pm )
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is a delay of thirty
four days' delay in passing the order of detention.
4. In the instant case, the detenu was arrested on 04.06.2025
and thereafter, the detention order came to be passed on 07.07.2024. This
fact is not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The Apex
Court in the case of 'Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura',
reported in '2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813' in respect of 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, had held that the live and
proximate link, between the grounds and the purpose of detention, stands
snapped in arresting the detenu. The relevant passage of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court is extracted hereunder:-
“20. It is manifestly clear from a conspectus of the above
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2025 03:37:25 pm )
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.”
5. 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.
6. 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 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 delay in passing the order of
detention, after the arrest of the detenue, the detention order in the present
case, is liable to be quashed.
7. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2025 03:37:25 pm )
and in view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that the detention
order is liable to be quashed.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, the Habeas Corpus Petition is
allowed and the Detention Order passed by the Second Respondent in
C3/D.O./90/2025 dated 07.07.2025, is hereby set aside. The detenue, viz.,
A.Solomon, S/o.Ambrose aged about 25 years, who is now confined in the
Central Prison, Cuddalore, is hereby directed to be set at liberty forthwith
unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.
(N.S.K,J.,) (M.J.R,J.,)
30.10.2025
Index: Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
ar
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
AND
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2025 03:37:25 pm )
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
ar
To:
1. The Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The District Collector cum District Magistrate,
Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Cuddalore District.
4. The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Cuddalore.
5. The Inspector of Police
Railway Police Station, Cuddalore.
6. The Joint Secretary to Government
Public (Law & Order),
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
7. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras. H.C.P.No.1764 of 2025
30.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2025 03:37:25 pm )
