Madras High Court
Selvi vs The Secretary To The Government on 31 July, 2023
Author: M.Sundar
Bench: M.Sundar
H.C.P.No.942 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 31.07.2023
Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
H.C.P.No.942 of 2023
Selvi .. Petitioner /
Mother of detenu
vs
1.The Secretary to the Government
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
Secretariat
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate of Ranipet
Ranipet
Ranipet District
3. The Superintendent of Police
Ranipet
Ranipet District
4. The Superintendent
Central Prison
Vellore
5. State Rep. By
The Inspector of Police
Shokinghur Police Station
Ranipet District .. Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/9
H.C.P.No.942 of 2023
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call for the entire records in
connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent
dated 19.12.2022 in Memo B3/D.O.No.75 /2022 against the petitioner
son Gopi, M/24 years, son of Munusamy, who is confined at Central
Prison, Vellore and set aside the same and consequently direct the
respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at
liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Saranraj
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak,
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.] When the captioned 'Habeas Corpus Petition' [hereinafter 'HCP' for the sake of convenience and clarity] was listed in the Admission Board on 02.06.2023, this Court made the following order:
'Captioned Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed in this Court on 07.03.2023 inter alia assailing a detention order dated 19.12.2022 bearing reference B3/D.O.No.75 of 2022 made by 'second respondent' [hereinafter 'Detaining Authority' for the sake of convenience and clarity]. To be noted, fifth respondent is the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/9 H.C.P.No.942 of 2023 Sponsoring Authority.
2. To be noted, mother of the detenu is the petitioner.
3. Mr.A.Saranraj, learned counsel on record for habeas corpus petitioner is before us. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that ground case qua the detenu is for alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b) and 302 of 'Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860)' ['IPC' for brevity] in Crime No.276 of 2022 on the file of Sholinghur Police Station.
4. The aforementioned detention order has been made on the premise that the detenu is a 'Goonda' 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 No.14 of 1982)' [hereinafter 'Act 14 of 1982' for the sake of convenience and clarity].
5. The detention order has been assailed inter alia on the ground that 'live and proximate link' between the grounds of detention and purpose of detention had snapped as detenu was arrested on 26.10.2022 but the impugned detention order has been made only on 19.12.2022.
6. Prima facie case made out for admission. Admit. Issue Rule nisi returnable by four weeks.
7. Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, State of Tamil Nadu accepts notice for all respondents. List the captioned Habeas Corpus Petition accordingly.' https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/9 H.C.P.No.942 of 2023
2. The aforementioned order made in the 02.06.2023 Admission listing shall be read as an integral part and parcel of this order which means that the short forms, short references and abbreviations used in the order in the Admission listing shall be used in the instant order also.
3. There are two adverse cases. The ground case which constitutes the sole substratum of the impugned preventive detention order is Crime No.276 of 2022 on the file of Sholinghur Police Station for alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b) and 302 of IPC. Owing to the nature of the challenge to the impugned preventive detention order, it is not necessary to delve into the factual matrix or be detained further by facts.
4. Mr.A.Saranraj, learned counsel on record for petitioner and Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor for all respondents are before us.
5.At the time of admission board, the point that 'live and proximate link' between the grounds of detention and purpose of detention had snapped as detenu was arrested on 26.10.2022 but the impugned preventive detention order has been made only on 19.12.2022 was urged, however in the final hearing, learned counsel for petitioner projected his argument qua challenge to the impugned preventive https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/9 H.C.P.No.942 of 2023 detention order on one point and that one point turns on not providing translated copy of a document (relied on by the detaining authority) in a language which the detenu is conversant with. Learned counsel adverting to page 72 of the grounds booklet submitted that copy of bail petition of the detenu in the ground case in Tamil has not been given to the detenu.
6. We had the benefit of perusing the booklet. We also noticed that bail petition in the ground case forms part of the ground on which the impugned preventive detention order has been made. As this turns on obtaining scenario which comes to light from the booklet which is before us, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor does not have much of a say.
7. Be that as it may, we are informed that the literacy level of the detenu is 10th standard and he is a school drop out. We are also informed that the detenu is conversant only with Tamil. Relevant portion of the confession is in Page No.43 of the grounds booklet and the same reads as follows:
'vd; bgau; nfhgp/ vd; mk;kh bgah; bry;tp/ vd;Dld; gpwe;jth;fs; xU mf;fh bgah; yjh/ ehd; muR gs;spapy; 10Mk; tFg;g[ tiu goj;Js;nsd;/ gog;g[ rupahf tuhjjhy; rpwJ fhyk; flY}hpy; L: tPyu; bkf;fhdpf; filapy; ntiy bra;njd;/ ' https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/9 H.C.P.No.942 of 2023
8. We remind ourselves of Powanammal case i.e., Powanammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court addressed itself to this translation point in a similar fact situation. The question which the Hon'ble Supreme Court addressed itself to is captured in paragraph 6 and the manner in which a Hon'ble Bench of the Supreme Court answered this question is captured in paragraph 16. To be noted, Powanammal case is reported in (1999) 2 SCC 413 and paragraphs 6 and 16 {as in SCC journal} read as follows:
'6. The short question that falls for our consideration is whether failure to supply the Tamil version of the order of remand passed in English, a language not known to the detenue, would vitiate her further detention.
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 circumstances, renders her continued detention illegal.
We, therefore, direct that the detenue be set free forthwith unless she is required to be detained in any other case. The appeal is accordingly allowed. ' https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/9 H.C.P.No.942 of 2023
9. In the case on hand, we find that ground case bail petition of the detenu which has been relied on as part of the grounds of detention qua impugned detention order is a crucial document and not furnishing translation of the same in Tamil, the lone language known to the detenu, has impaired his constitutional right to make an effective representation qua the impugned detention order. We therefore have no hesitation in saying that the impugned detention order deserves to be dislodged.
10. Ergo, the sequitur is, captioned HCP is allowed. Impugned detention order dated 19.12.2022 bearing reference B3/D.O.No.75 of 2022 made by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu Thiru.Gopi aged 24 years, Son of Thiru.Munusamy, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case / cases. There shall be no order as to costs.
(M.S.,J.) (R.S.V.,J.) 31.07.2023 Index : Yes Neutral Citation : Yes gpa P.S: Registry to forthwith communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Vellore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/9 H.C.P.No.942 of 2023 To
1.The Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat Chennai – 600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate of Ranipet Ranipet Ranipet District
3. The Superintendent of Police Ranipet Ranipet District
4. The Superintendent Central Prison Vellore
5. The Inspector of Police Sholinghur Police Station Ranipet District
6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/9 H.C.P.No.942 of 2023 M.SUNDAR, J., and R.SAKTHIVEL , J., gpa H.C.P.No.942 of 2023 31.07.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/9