[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
K.Sandhya vs Additional Chief Secretary To The ... on 16 April, 2026
Author: Anita Sumanth
Bench: Anita Sumanth
2026:MHC:1490
H.C.P.No.2133 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.04.2026
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
H.C.P.No.2133 of 2025
K.Sandhya, (Aged 21 years),
W/o. Krishnamoorthy,
No.30, Johnibasha Street, Royapettah,
Chennai-600 014. .. Petitioner
vs
1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition & Excise Department,
Secretariat, Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai,
Office of the Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Central Prison,
Puzhal, Chennai.
4.The Inspector of Police,
D-2, Anna Salai Police Station,
Chennai. .. Respondents
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying
for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records pertaining to
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.No.2133 of 2025
the order of detention passed by the second respondent in his proceedings
in No.558/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025, dated 11.08.2025 and quash the same
as illegal and produce the detenue, namely Krishnamoorthi S/o Ramu,
aged 24 years, as GOONDA now he is confined in Central Prison, Puzhal
II, Chennai before this Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Vignesh
For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj
Additional Public Prosecutor
assisted by
Mr.M.Sylvester John
ORDER
(Made by Dr. ANITA SUMANTH, J.)
In this Habeas Corpus Petition, the wife of Krishnamoorthy S/o
Ramu, who has been detained under order dated 11.08.2025 and kept in
custody of Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai has challenged the order of
detention.
2.We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
3.One of the grounds on the basis of which the order of detention
has been passed is that there is a possibility of the detenu being enlarged
on bail. Such a subjective satisfaction is arrived at by the authority based
on an order passed in Crl.M.P.No.26094 of 2024 by the Court of
Sessions, Chennai on 19.09.2024. However, as pointed out by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, there is a difference in the two orders, in that,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the accused in that case only one previous case whereas in the present, the
accused has two previous cases, thus limiting his chances for bail.
4.Hence, we are of the considered view that the detaining authority
is not right in comparing the two cases as the gravity of the situation is far
more in the present case. His inference that the detenu will be enlarged on
bail is thus not supported by any materials and hence, vitiates the
impugned order of detention.
5.In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition
is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in
No.558/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025 dated 11.08.2025, is set aside.
6.The detenu, viz., Krishnamoorthy, S/o. Ramu, aged 24 years,
who is now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal-II, Chennai, is directed to
be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection
with any other case.
[A.S.M, J.] [S.M, J.]
16.04.2026
vs
Index:Yes/No
Speaking order
Neutral Citation:Yes
Note to Registry: Issue Today.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition & Excise Department,
Secretariat, Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai,
Office of the Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Central Prison,
Puzhal-II, Chennai.
4.The Inspector of Police,
D-2, Anna Salai Police Station,
Chennai.
5.The Joint Secretary,
Law and Order Department,
Secretariat, Chennai
6.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
DR. ANITA SUMANTH,J.
and
SUNDER MOHAN,J.
vs
16.04.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
