Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition and Quashes Preventive Detention Order in Job Racketing Case. Court holds that prolonged preventive detention can be substituted by ordinary criminal proceedings under police investigation.

High Court: Madras High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, K.V. Santosh, son of the detenu G. Lakshmi, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court challenging the preventive detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai (second respondent) on 01.07.2024 in Memo No.744/BCDFGISSSV/2024. The detenu, a 48-year-old woman, was confined in the Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai. The ground case involved a criminal case for alleged job racketing, where the detenu's husband (Accused No.1) had been murdered by some victims. The detenu was alleged to have assisted her husband in the commission of the offence. The court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B. Mohan, and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. R. Muniyapparaj, for the respondents. The court noted that the detenu had already been under preventive detention for about seven months. Considering the longevity of actual imprisonment under preventive detention law and that the case could be dealt with by police authorities under ordinary law by following procedures, the court was inclined to allow the petition. Accordingly, the impugned detention order was quashed, and the detenu was directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.

Headnote

A) Preventive Detention - Habeas Corpus - Quashing of Detention Order - Longevity of Detention - The court considered that the detenu had been under preventive detention for about seven months and the case could be dealt with under ordinary law by police authorities. Held that the detention order is quashed and the detenu is to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case (Paras 3-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the preventive detention order against the detenu should be quashed considering the longevity of imprisonment and the availability of ordinary criminal law procedures.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The impugned order of detention passed by the second respondent in Memo No.744/BCDFGISSSV/2024 dated 01.07.2024 is quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition stands allowed. The detenu, Tmt. Lakshmi, W/o. Venkatesan, aged about 48 years, now confined in Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless she is otherwise required in connection with any other case.

Law Points

  • Preventive detention
  • Habeas corpus
  • Quashing of detention order
  • Ordinary law alternative
  • Longevity of detention
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 107

H.C.P.No.3248 of 2024

2025-01-24

S.M. Subramaniam, M. Jothiraman

Mr. B. Mohan (for petitioner), Mr. R. Muniyapparaj (Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents)

K.V. Santosh

1. The Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, 2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Special Prison for Women-Puzhal, 4. The Inspector of Police, Alpha-7, Job Racket Investigation Wing, Central Crime Branch, Greater Chennai Police

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Habeas Corpus Petition challenging preventive detention order

Remedy Sought

Quashing of detention order and release of detenu

Filing Reason

Detenu's son challenged the preventive detention order passed against his mother

Previous Decisions

Detention order passed by second respondent on 01.07.2024 in Memo No.744/BCDFGISSSV/2024

Issues

Whether the preventive detention order should be quashed due to longevity of detention and availability of ordinary law

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued for quashing of detention order Respondents opposed through Additional Public Prosecutor

Ratio Decidendi

Considering the longevity of actual imprisonment under Preventive Detention Law and the case against the detenu can be dealt with by the Police authorities under the ordinary law by following the procedures, the detention order is quashed.

Judgment Excerpts

The detenue is already under Preventive Detention for about seven months. Considering the longevity of actual imprisonment under Preventive Detention Law and the case against the detenue can be dealt with by the Police authorities under the ordinary law by following the procedures, this Court is inclined to consider the present Habeas Corpus Petition.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed H.C.P.No.3248 of 2024 before the Madras High Court challenging the detention order dated 01.07.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 24.01.2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition and Quashes Preventive Detention Order in Job Racketing Case. Court holds that prolonged preventive detention can be substituted by ordinary criminal proceedings under police investigation.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appeal of Cinema Owner in ESI Act Case — Employees of Contractor and Handbill Boys Not Counted as Employees. Principal Employer Not Liable for ESI Contributions for Contractor's Employees Under Section 2(9) of ESI Act, 1948...