AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.N.Prakash, J
The petitioner is the detenu B.Vijay, S/o.Baskar, aged 23 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in C.No.18/G/IS/2022 dated 23.02.2022, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.
Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the order of detention, he has mainly focused his argument on the ground that the arrest intimation has not been properly translated in vernacular language. This deprived the detenu from making effective representation. Therefore, on this ground, the detention order is liable to be quashed.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the habeas corpus petition by filing his counter.
On consideration of the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the documents available on record especially Page Nos.23 and 24 of the booklet, it is clear that the arrest intimation has not been properly translated in vernacular language. Thus the impugned detention order is liable to be set aside on this ground.
In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in C.No.18/G/IS/2022 dated 23.02.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz. B.Vijay, S/o.Baskar, aged 23 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.