Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Jansirani, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court seeking to quash the detention order passed by the second respondent (District Collector and District Magistrate, Vellore) in C3/D.O.NO.105/2024 dated 28.11.2024. The detention order was issued against the petitioner's husband, Ramarajan, aged about 32 years, who was confined in Central Prison, Salem. The order relied on three adverse cases: one under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) and two under the Prohibition Act, along with a ground case also under the Prohibition Act. The court, comprising Justice S.M.Subramaniam and Justice M.Jothiraman, heard the counsel for the petitioner, Mr.C.Deepakkumar, and the Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.R.Muniyapparaj. The court observed that all the cases could be dealt with by the police authorities under ordinary law, and therefore, keeping the detenue under preventive detention law was not required. Consequently, the court quashed the detention order and allowed the Habeas Corpus Petition, directing that the detenue be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Habeas Corpus - Quashing of Detention Order - Cases Triable Under Ordinary Law - The court held that when the adverse cases and ground case are registered under the Prohibition Act and NDPS Act, they can be dealt with by police under ordinary law, and preventive detention is not required. The impugned detention order was quashed and the detenue was directed to be set at liberty. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the preventive detention order under the Prohibition Act and NDPS Act was justified when the cases could be dealt with under ordinary law
Final Decision
The impugned detention order dated 28.11.2024 is quashed. The Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenue, Ramarajan, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Preventive detention not warranted when cases can be dealt with under ordinary law
- Habeas Corpus petition allowed
