Madras High Court
M.Shobika vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 11 September, 2023
Author: M.Sundar
Bench: M.Sundar
H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023
M.Shobika
D/o.S.Manickam .. Petitioner in HCP No.604/2023
Jalaludeen
S/o.Tajudeen .. Petitioner in HCP No.617/2023
Sariba
W/o.Ubaithla .. Petitioner in HCP No.702/2023
Muniyammal
W/o.Ravichandran .. Petitioner in HCP No.725/2023
Merlin Vasanthakumari
W/o.Ezekiel .. Petitioner in HCP No.940/2023
Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Represented by its Secretary
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
Fort St.George
Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police
Coimbatore City
Coimbatore District.
Page Nos.1/22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023
3. The Inspector of Police
C2, Race Course Police Station
Coimbatore
Coimbatore District.
4. The Superintendent of Central Prison
Cuddalore Central Prison
Coimbatore District ..Respondents in HCP No.604/2023
1. The Secretary to Government
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department
Secretariat, Fort St.George
Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police / Detaining Authority
Huzur Road,
Coimbatore City
Coimbatore - 18.07.2023
3. The Superintendent of Police
Central Prison - Coimbatore
Coimbatore District.
4. State rep. by its
The Inspector of Police
C-2, Race Course Police Station
Coimbatore District. ..Respondents in HCP No.617/2023
1. The Secretary to the Government
Home, Prohibition & Excise Department
Secretariat
Chennai-600 009.
2. Office of the Commissioner of Police
Coimbatore City
Coimbatore District.
Page Nos.2/22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023
3. The Superintendent
Central Prison
Coimbatore.
4. The Inspector of Police
Race Course Police Station
Coimbatore City
Coimbatore District. ..Respondents
in HCP Nos.702, 725 & 940 /2023
Habeas Corpus Petition No.604 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call
for the records made in C.No.36/G/IS/2023 dated 24.03.2023 passed by the
Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore City, Coimbatore District, the second
respondent herein and quash the same as illegal and direct the respondents to
produce the detenu M.Sanjay Raja son of Manickam, aged 31 years, now
confined in Central Prison, Cuddalore, before this Honourable Court and set
him at liberty.
Habeas Corpus Petition No.617 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call
for the entire records, relating to the petitioner's son detention under Tamil
Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 24.03.2023 on the file of the
second respondent herein made in proceedings Memo C.No.35/G/IS/2023,
quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to
produce the petitioner's son namely, J.Kaja Hussain, Son of Jalaludeen, aged
23 years before this Hon'ble High Court and set the petitioner's son at liberty
from detention, now the petitioner's son detained at Central Prison,
Coimbatore.
Page Nos.3/22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023
Habeas Corpus Petition No.702 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call
for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the 2nd
respondent dated 24.03.2023 in C.No.33/G/IS/2023 against the petitioner's
son U.Salbalhan, male, 22 years, son of Ubaidhullah, who is confined at
Central Prison, Coimbatore and set aside the same and consequently, direct
the respondents to produce the detenu before the Hon'ble Court and set him
at liberty.
Habeas Corpus Petition No.725 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call
for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the 2nd
respondent dated 24.03.2023 in C.No.32/G/IS/2023 against the petitioner's
son R.Sanjaykumar, male, aged 23 years, son of Ravichandran, who is
confined at Central Prison, Coimbatore and set aside the same and
consequently, direct the respondents to produce the detenu before the
Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty.
Habeas Corpus Petition No.940 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call
for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the 2nd
respondent dated 24.03.2023 in C.No.34/G/IS/2023 against the petitioner's
son E.Alwin, male, aged 38 years, son of Ezekiel, who is confined at Central
Prison, Coimbatore and set aside the same and consequently, direct the
respondents to produce the detenu before the Hon'ble Court and set him at
liberty.
For Petitioner
in HCP No.604 of 2023 : Mr.R.Siranjeevi
Page Nos.4/22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023
in HCP No.617 of 2023 : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi
in HCP Nos.702, 725 & 940 of 2023 : Mr.A.Saranraj
representing Mr.A.Jayaraman
For Respondents in all HCPs : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional State Public Prosecutor
COMMON ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,] This common order will now dispose of the captioned five 'Habeas Corpus Petitions' [hereinafter 'HCPs' in plural and 'HCP' in singular for the sake of brevity and convenience]. Further more, for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity, 'HCP.No.604 of 2023' shall be referred to as 'I HCP', 'HCP No.617 of 2023' shall be referred to as 'II HCP', 'HCP No.702 of 2023' shall be referred to as 'III HCP', 'HCP No.725 of 2023' shall be referred to as 'IV HCP' and 'HCP No.940 of 2023' shall be referred to as 'V HCP' wherever necessary.
2. Admission Board orders made in captioned five HCPs are as follows:
I HCP:'H.C.P.No.604 of 2023 Page Nos.5/22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 M.SUNDAR, J., and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J., (Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,) Captioned Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed in this Court on 03.04.2023 inter alia assailing a detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.36/G/IS/2023 made by 'second respondent' [hereinafter 'Detaining Authority' for the sake of convenience and clarity]. To be noted, third respondent is the Sponsoring Authority.
2. Sister of detenu is the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that ground case qua the detenu is for alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 506(ii) of 'The Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)' [hereinafter 'IPC' for the sake of convenience and clarity] subsequently, altered into Sections 147, 148, 302, 506(ii) of IPC read with 27(3) of Arms Act, 1959 in Crime No.81 of 2023 on the file of C-2 Race Course 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 Page Nos.6/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 ground that there is a delay in passing the impugned detention order.
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.' II HCP:
'H.C.P.No.617 of 2023
M.SUNDAR, J., and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J., (Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,) Captioned Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed in this Court on 10.04.2023 inter alia assailing a detention order dated 24.03.2022 bearing reference C.No.35/G/IS/2023 made by 'second respondent' [hereinafter 'Detaining Authority' for the sake of convenience and clarity]. To be noted, fourth respondent is the Sponsoring Authority.
2. To be noted, father of the detenu is the petitioner.
3. Mr.S.Selvakumar, learned counsel representing the 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, 302 and 506(ii) of 'Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860)' ['IPC' for brevity] altered to 147, 148, 302 and 506(ii) IPC and 27(3) of Arms Act, 1959 in Crime No.81 of 2023 on the file of C-2 Race Course Police Station, Coimbatore Page Nos.7/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 District.
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.
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.' III HCP:'H.C.P.No.702 of 2023
M.SUNDAR, J., and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J., (Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,) Captioned Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed in this Court on 21.04.2023 inter alia assailing a detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.33/G/IS/2023 made by 'second respondent' [hereinafter 'Detaining Authority' for the sake of convenience and Page Nos.8/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 clarity]. To be noted, fourth respondent is the Sponsoring Authority.
2. Mother of detenu is the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the ground case qua the detenu is for alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 506(ii) of 'The Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)' [hereinafter 'IPC' for the sake of convenience and clarity] subsequently altered into Sections 147, 148, 302 and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 27(3) of Arms Act, 1959 in Crime No.81 of 2023 on the file of C-2 Race Course 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 has snapped as the detenu was arrested on 15.02.2023 but the impugned detention order was passed on 24.03.2023.
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.' IV HCP:Page Nos.9/22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 'HCP No.725 of 2023 M.SUNDAR, J.
and R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
(Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR,J.,) Captioned 'Habeas Corpus Petition' [hereinafter 'HCP' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity] has been filed assailing a 'preventive detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.32/G/IS/2023' [hereinafter 'impugned preventive detention order' for the sake of convenience and clarity] made by the 'second respondent' [hereinafter 'Detaining Authority' for the sake of convenience and clarity] branding the detenu as '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].
2. Petitioner, who is the mother of the detenu, has filed the captioned HCP assailing the impugned preventive detention order.
3. Mr.A.Saranraj, learned counsel representing the counsel on record for petitioner submits that the impugned preventive detention order is predicated on one solitary case namely, Crime No.81 of 2023 dated 10.03.2023 for alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 506(ii) of 'The Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)' [hereinafter 'IPC' for the sake of convenience and clarity] and Section 27(3) of Arms Act, 1959 on the file of the fourth respondent (Inspector of Police, Page Nos.10/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 Race Course Police Station i.e., Sponsoring Authority). Learned counsel submits that the detenu voluntarily surrendered on 15.02.2023 in the ground case which is the solitary case that constitutes the impugned preventive detention order but the impugned preventive detention order has been made only on 24.03.2023.
Learned counsel goes on to submit that the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of detention has snapped and in support of his contention, learned counsel drew our attention to Banik's principle i.e., oft-quoted Sushanta Kumar Banik's case [Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura & others reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813 : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1333].
4. Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (assisted by learned counsel Mr.Sylvestor John) who accepted notice on behalf of all respondents requests for a short accommodation to get instructions and revert to this Court.
5. Be that as it may, we are informed that preventive detention orders were clamped on co-accused in aforementioned ground case also and that those preventive detention orders have also been assailed vide HCP Nos.702 and 940 of 2023.
6. List the captioned HCP along with HCP Nos.702 and 940 of 2023.' V HCP:
'HCP No.940 of 2023
M.SUNDAR, J.
and R.SAKTHIVEL, J.Page Nos.11/22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 (Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR,J.,) Captioned 'Habeas Corpus Petition' [hereinafter 'HCP' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity] has been filed assailing a 'preventive detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.34/G/IS/2023' [hereinafter 'impugned preventive detention order' for the sake of convenience and clarity] made by the 'second respondent' [hereinafter 'Detaining Authority' for the sake of convenience and clarity] branding the detenu as '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].
2. Petitioner, who is the mother of the detenu, has filed the captioned HCP assailing the impugned preventive detention order.
3. Mr.A.Jayaraman, learned counsel on record for petitioner submits that the impugned preventive detention order is predicated on one solitary case namely, Crime No.81 of 2023 dated 10.03.2023 for alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 506(ii) of 'The Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)' [hereinafter 'IPC' for the sake of convenience and clarity] and Section 27(3) of Arms Act, 1959 on the file of the fourth respondent (Inspector of Police, Race Course Police Station i.e., Sponsoring Authority). Learned counsel submits that the detenu voluntarily surrendered on 15.02.2023 in the ground case which is the solitary case that constitutes the impugned preventive detention order but the impugned preventive detention Page Nos.12/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 order has been made only on 24.03.2023. Learned counsel goes on to submit that the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of detention has snapped and in support of his contention, learned counsel drew our attention to Banik's principle i.e., oft-
quoted Sushanta Kumar Banik's case [Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura & others reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813 :
2022 SCC OnLine SC 1333].
4. Mr.R.Muniyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (assisted by learned counsel Mr.Sylvestor John) who accepted notice on behalf of all respondents requests for a short accommodation to get instructions and revert to this Court.
5. Be that as it may, we are informed that preventive detention orders were clamped on co-accused in aforementioned ground case also and that those preventive detention orders have also been assailed vide HCP Nos.702, 725 and 940 of 2023.
6. List the captioned HCP along with HCP Nos.702, 725 and 940 of 2023.'
3. Aforementioned Admission board orders capture all essentials i.e., facts that are imperative for appreciating this common final order and therefore, we are not setting out the same here again in this common final order and burdening this common final order with facts again. Suffice to say that the aforementioned five Admission Board orders shall now be read as an integral part and parcel of this common final order.
4. As would be evident from the Admission Board orders, at the time Page Nos.13/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 of admission, learned counsel for petitioners posited their challenge against the impugned preventive detention orders on the points that 'live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of detention' had snapped and that there is delay in passing the impugned preventive detention order but in the final hearing today, learned counsel changed their line of attack qua their campaign against the impugned preventive detention orders and submitted that remand order dated 15.02.2023 made by 'Judicial Magistrate, Arakkonam' [hereinafter 'said Magistrate' for the sake of convenience] has not been correctly translated in Tamil. To be noted, relevant portion in 15.02.2023 remand order made in English by learned said Magistrate reads as follows:
'........... are remanded to Judicial custody till 21.02.2023. On the said day they shall be produced before the J.M.III Court, Coimbatore.' Tamil translation of the same reads as follows:
'////////mth;fs; 21/02/2023k; njjp tiu ePjpkd;wf; fhtypy; rpiwapyilf;fg;gLfpwhh;fs;/ Twg;gl;l njjpapy; mth;fs; Fw;wtpay; ePjpj;Jiw eLth; vz/III ePjpkd;wj;jpd; Kd;g[ M$uhf;fg;gLthh;fs;////////////'
5. For extension of remand, four accused therein (detenus in II, III, IV Page Nos.14/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 and V HCPs) were to be produced on 21.02.2023 before learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Coimbatore but Tamil translation merely says learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, without mentioning it is Coimbatore. As regards I HCP, it is remand order dated 15.02.2023 as detenu in I HCP surrendered before II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore on 21.02.2023. However, it is to be noted that this error in translation is there in grounds booklet served on the detenu qua I HCP also.
6. In response to the aforementioned argument, Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned State Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that it is a minor secretarial / clerical error and pointed out that though learned Judicial Magistrate No.III has been mentioned only Coimbatore has been omitted.
Learned Prosecutor submitted that as regards I HCP i.e., HCP No.604 of 2023, remand order dated 15.02.2023 has not been adverted to in the grounds of impugned preventive detention order.
7. The literacy level of five detenus is either very low or not very high i.e., school drop outs / discontinued a Diploma course. This coupled with the fact that we are dealing with a Court order which is technical with a tinge of Page Nos.15/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 legalise leaves us with the view that Powanammal principle [Powanammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (1999) 2 SCC 413] is attracted. Relevant paragraphs in Powanammal principle are paragraph Nos.6 and 16 which 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. '
8. We carefully considered the rival submissions.
9. We find that the argument of learned counsel for petitioners that Powanammal principle is attracted deserves to be sustained owing to literacy levels of detenus and technical document / legalise point. In any event, the remand order has been made in English by learned said Magistrate and therefore, it is a legal document in English. In this view of the matter Page Nos.16/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 also, Powanammal principle will be attracted.
10. Besides Powanammal principle, we also find that omission of Coimbatore and mere mentioning of Judicial Magistrate No.III in Tamil baffles the detenus which in turn has impaired the rights of detenus qua making an effective representation against the impugned preventive detention orders. This Court has repeatedly held that such rights of the detenu to make an effective representation against an impugned preventive detention order is a Constitutional safeguard ingrained in Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and violation of the same vitiates the preventive detention orders and leaves them liable to be dislodged in habeas legal drill. Therefore, impugned preventive detention orders deserve to be dislodged on this score also. This aspect of the matter takes care of second limb of argument of learned Prosecutor i.e., that the grounds of impugned preventive detention order does not advert to 15.02.2023 remand order in I HCP (HCP.No.604 of 2023).
11. Before we conclude, we deem it appropriate to record that learned Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the Page Nos.17/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 trial Court in the ground case qua all five detenus on 10.05.2022 well within prescribed 90 days. This means that five detenus will not now be entitled for default bail under Section 167(2) of 'The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)' [hereinafter 'Cr.PC' for the sake of brevity and clarity] and they have to apply for regular bail inter alia under Section 439 of Cr.PC. We make it clear that if the detenus apply for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.PC, the same shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law by the Court concerned de hors this order which has been made for the limited purpose of testing the impugned preventive detention orders in the habeas legal drill on hand.
12. Before concluding, we also remind ourselves that preventive detention is not a punishment and HCP is a high prerogative writ.
13.1. Apropos, the sequitur is, captioned HCP No.604 of 2023 is allowed. Impugned preventive detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.36/G/IS/2023 made by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu Thiru.M.Sanjay Raja, male, aged 31 years, son of Thiru.Manickam, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in Page Nos.18/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 connection with any other case / cases.
13.2. Apropos, the sequitur is, captioned HCP No.617 of 2023 is allowed. Impugned preventive detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.35/G/IS/2023 made by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu Thiru.J.Kaja Hussain, male, aged 23 years, son of Mr.Jalaludeen, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case / cases.
13.3. Apropos, the sequitur is, captioned HCP No.702 of 2023 is allowed. Impugned preventive detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.33/G/IS/2023 made by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu Thiru.U.Salbalhan, male, aged 22 years, son of Mr.Ubaidhullah, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case / cases.
13.4. Apropos, the sequitur is, captioned HCP No.725 of 2023 is allowed. Impugned preventive detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing Page Nos.19/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 reference C.No.32/G/IS/2023 made by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu Thiru.R.Sanjay Kumar, male, aged 23 years, son of Mr.Ravichandran, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case / cases.
13.5. Apropos, the sequitur is, captioned HCP No.940 of 2023 is allowed. Impugned preventive detention order dated 24.03.2023 bearing reference C.No.34/G/IS/2023 made by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu Thiru.E.Alwin, male, aged 38 years, son of Thiru.Ezekiel, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case / cases.
(M.S.,J.) (R.S.V.,J.) 11.09.2023 Index : Yes Speaking Neutral Citation : Yes mk P.S:
1. Registry to forthwith communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Cuddalore.
2. Registry to forthwith communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Coimbatore.
To Page Nos.20/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023
1. The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Secretary Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St.George Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police Coimbatore City Coimbatore District.
3. The Inspector of Police C2, Race Course Police Station Coimbatore Coimbatore District.
4. The Superintendent of Central Prison Cuddalore Central Prison Coimbatore District.
5. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.
M.SUNDAR, J., and Page Nos.21/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 R.SAKTHIVEL, J., mk H.C.P.Nos.604, 617, 702, 725 and 940 of 2023 11.09.2023 Page Nos.22/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis