Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mariyammal, mother of the detenu Sathish, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court. She sought to quash the detention order dated 05.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Salem City, in CMP.No.99/Goonda/Salem City/2024, and to direct the respondents to produce her son, who was confined at Central Prison, Salem, and set him at liberty. The case was heard by a Division Bench comprising Justice S.M.Subramaniam and Justice M.Jothiraman. During the hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. R.Muniyapparaj, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the impugned detention order had already been revoked by the competent authority. In view of this submission, the court held that no further adjudication was required and closed the Habeas Corpus Petition. The order was pronounced on 23.01.2025.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Habeas Corpus - Revocation of Detention Order - The petitioner challenged the detention order under the Goondas Act. The court closed the petition as the detention order was already revoked by the competent authority, rendering the petition infructuous. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Habeas Corpus petition requires adjudication when the impugned detention order has been revoked by the competent authority.
Final Decision
Habeas Corpus Petition closed as infructuous in view of revocation of detention order by competent authority.
Law Points
- Habeas Corpus petition becomes infructuous if detention order is revoked
- No further adjudication required when detention order is revoked
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 164
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, M.JOTHIRAMAN
Mr.S.Sengkodi (for petitioner), Mr.R.Muniyapparaj (Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents)
State rep by The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Chennai; The Commissioner of Police, Salem City; The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Salem; The Inspector of Police, Pallapathy Police Station, Salem
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Habeas Corpus petition challenging preventive detention order under the Goondas Act
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of detention order dated 05.12.2024 and direction to produce detenu and set him at liberty
Filing Reason
Detention of petitioner's son under preventive detention order
Issues
Whether the Habeas Corpus petition requires adjudication when the impugned detention order has been revoked by the competent authority.
Submissions/Arguments
Respondents' counsel submitted that the detention order has been revoked by the competent authority, rendering the petition infructuous.
Ratio Decidendi
When a detention order is revoked by the competent authority, a Habeas Corpus petition challenging it becomes infructuous and no further adjudication is required.
Judgment Excerpts
Mr. R.Muniyapparaj, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents made a submission that the impugned order of detention has already been revoked by the competent Authority and thus, no further adjudication needs to be undertaken.
In view of the above submission, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed HCP No.39 of 2025 before Madras High Court challenging detention order dated 05.12.2024. During hearing, respondents informed that detention order was revoked. Court closed the petition on 23.01.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
