HCP No. 223 of 2026 __________ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN HCP No. 223 of 2026 M. Elangeswari ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. 2. The District Collector and District Magistrate, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Ariyalur District. 4. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli. 5. The Inspector of Police, Venganur Police Station, Ariyalur District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records relating to the detention order passed by the second respondent pertaining to the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 223 of 2026 __________ order made in Cr.M.P.No.21/2025 dated 20.11.2025 in detain the detenu under 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, as a Goonda and quash the same and direct the Respondent to produce the detenu Kaviyarasan, Son of Murugesan aged about 23 years, who is detained at Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner(s): Mr.G.Nirmal Krishnan For Respondent(s): Mr.C.R.Malarvannan Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Sunder Mohan J.) The mother of the detenu – Kaviyarasan, aged 23 years, S/o.Murugesan, has filed this petition challenging the detention order dated 20.11.2025, branding him as ‘Goonda’ under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act, 1982 (Act 14/1982). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) for the respondents. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 223 of 2026 __________ 3. The detention order is liable to be quashed for more than one reason. Firstly, we find that the continued detention is illegal as the detenu has been deprived of his right to make effective representation, since page nos. 66 and 112 of volume II of the booklet supplied to the detenu is illegible. It is needless to say that furnishing of an illegible copy amounts to non-supply of the document. 4. In this context, it is useful to refer to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Powanammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu' reported in '(1999) 2 SCC 413'. “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 detenu 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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 223 of 2026 __________ detention or among the grounds thereof. In such a case, the detenu'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 detenu, 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 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.” 5.Secondly, it is seen from the grounds of detention that the detaining authority has stated that the detenu has moved a bail application before the Principal and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur in Cr.M.P.No.2472 of 2025 and that the same came to be dismissed on 14.11.2025. However, he has also stated that the relatives of the detenu are taking steps to bring him out on bail. Admittedly, there was no material placed before the detaining authority that the detenu or his relatives were taking steps to file a bail application. In such circumstances, inference of the detaining authority that the detenu is likely to file a bail application and come out https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 223 of 2026 __________ on bail is his mere ipse dixit. Since the satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority is without basis, the conclusion that the detenu would indulge in further criminal activities, is vitiated. Hence, for both the reasons, the detention order is liable to be quashed. 6. In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in Cr.M.P.No:21/2025, dated 20.11.2025, is set aside. 7. The detenu, viz., Kaviyarasan, aged 23 years, S/o.Murugesan, who is now confined in Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli, is hereby 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.) 08-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Tsg Note: Issue Order copy today. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 223 of 2026 __________ To 1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. 2. The District Collector and District Magistrate, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Ariyalur District. 4. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli. 5. The Inspector of Police, Venganur Police Station, Ariyalur District. 6. The Joint Secretary, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. 7. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 223 of 2026 __________ DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J. AND SUNDER MOHAN, J. TSG HCP No. 223 of 2026 08-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis