Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Angayi Kanakarathinam, mother of the detenu Ranganathan alias Rangarajan, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court. The petition sought to quash the detention order passed by the second respondent (District Magistrate and Collector, Namakkal District) in CMP.No.77/SEXUAL OFFENDER/2024 dated 27.11.2024, under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, classifying the detenu as a 'Goonda'. The detenu, aged about 31 years, was confined in Central Prison, Salem. The court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. M. Karthik, and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. R. Muniyapparaj, for the respondents. The court observed that the criminal case registered against the detenu could be dealt with by the police authorities under ordinary law, and the preventive detention order was based on a solitary ground case. Consequently, the court opined that the continuance of preventive detention law was not required. The impugned detention order was quashed, and the Habeas Corpus Petition was allowed. The detenu was directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Solitary Ground Case - Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 - Goonda - The court held that the preventive detention order passed based on a solitary ground case is not sustainable and the continuance of preventive detention law may not be required. The criminal case registered against the detenu may be dealt with by the police authorities under ordinary law. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the preventive detention order passed under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 based on a solitary ground case is sustainable
Final Decision
The impugned order of detention passed by the second respondent in CMP.No.77/SEXUAL OFFENDER/2024 dated 27.11.2024 is quashed. The Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu, Ranganathan alias Rangarajan, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.
Law Points
- Preventive detention based on solitary ground case is not sustainable
- ordinary criminal law should take its course
