HCP No. 42 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN HCP No. 42 of 2026 Suresh ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the Additional Chief Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Police/Detaining Authority, Coimbatore City. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison Coimbatore, Coimbatore District. 4. The Inspector of Police, Ramanathapuram Police Station, Coimbatore District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records in Detention Order Passed in C.No.184/G/IS/2025 dated.13.11.2025 on the file of the 2nd Respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to produce the Person of Petitioner’s Son Thiru.Nagaarjun @ Appus Aged 19 years, S/o.Suresh, confined in Central Prison, Coimbatore District before this Court and set him at liberty. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 42 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Muraliragul 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 father of the detenu – S.Nagaarjun @ Appus, aged 19 years, S/o.Suresh has filed this petition challenging the detention order dated 13.11.2025, 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. 3.The detention order is liable to be quashed for more than one reason. It is seen from the grounds of detention that the detaining authority has stated that the detenu was in remand and that he was aware that his bail application was dismissed, and had relied upon a statement said to have been made by the mother of the detenu, under Section 180(3) of the BNSS that she is taking steps to file a bail application. However, we find that in the statement of the mother of the detenu there is no reference to the crime number of the ground case. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 42 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 4. On 03.03.2026, in HCP Nos. 2129, 2179 and 2340 of 2025, we had held that the unsigned statement cannot be relied upon to infer that the detenu is likely to file bail application. We had reiterated and clarified this view in a subsequent case, i.e., HCP No.2356 of 2025 dated 22.06.2026, after we were informed that our view was held to be per incuriam by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in HCP (MD) N0.369 of 2026 dated 19.06.2026. We have held that only a signed statement of a relative can be relied upon by the detaining authority to satisfy himself as regards the possibility of the detenu filing a bail application and that a Section 180(3) of BNSS statement cannot be the basis for such a satisfaction. 5. Therefore, the reliance placed on the said statement recorded under Section 180(3) of BNSS, by the detaining authority to arrive at the satisfaction that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail is misconceived. Thus, the inference that the detention is warranted since the detenu is likely to indulge in further criminal activities after his release on bail is based on the said wrong premise. 6.That apart, the index to Volume I of the booklet suggests that it contains 287 pages. However, the booklet furnished to the detenu has only 275 pages. There is no explanation as to what were the missing pages and why it was not https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 42 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 furnished to the detenu. This has deprived the right of the detenu to make effective representation. For both the reasons, the detention order is liable to be quashed. 7. In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in C.No.184/G/IS/2025, dated 13.11.2025, is set aside. 8. The detenu, viz., S.Nagaarjun @ Appus, aged 19 years, S/o.Suresh, who is now confined in Central Prison, Coimbatore, 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.) 17-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No TSG Note: Issue order copy today. To 1. The Additional Chief Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 42 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 2. The Commissioner of Police/Detaining Authority, Coimbatore City. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison Coimbatore, Coimbatore District. 4. The Inspector of Police, Ramanathapuram Police Station, Coimbatore District. 5. The Joint Secretary, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. 6. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 42 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J. AND SUNDER MOHAN, J. TSG HCP No. 42 of 2026 17-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis