AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.]
The petitioner is the mother of the detenu viz., Abdul Azees, son of Kalifathullah, aged about 25 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Cr.M.P.No.28 of 2025, dated 11.12.2025, holding him to be a "Sexual Offender", as contemplated under Section 2(ggg) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this habeas corpus petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Detaining Authority has relied on an order dated 29.01.2014 passed in Cr.M.P.No.364 of 2014, by the learned District Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri, granting bail to the accused in Crime No.3 of 2014, on the file of Bommidi Police Station, Dharmapuri District, as a similar case to infer that the detenu herein is likely to come out on bail. However, in the similar case, bail was granted on the ground that major portion of the investigation was over. However, in the case on hand, the bail application filed by the detenu was dismissed on the ground that the investigation is at the initial stage and therefore, the case relied upon by the Detaining Authority is not similar case to the case of the detenu herein. Further, he would submit that the document furnished at Page No.91 of the booklet was also not furnished in vernacular language to the detenue, despite a representation was made on 31.12.2025.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for State of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.
On perusal of the materials available on record, it is seen that the Detaining Authority has relied on an order dated 29.01.2014 passed in Cr.M.P.No.364 of 2014, passed by the learned District Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri, granting bail to the accused in Crime No.3 of 2014, on the file of Bommidi Police Station, Dharmapuri District, as a similar case to infer that the detenu herein is likely to come out on bail. However, in the similar case, bail was granted on the ground that major portion of the investigation was over. However, in the case on hand, the bail application filed by the detenu was dismissed on the ground that the investigation is at the initial stage and therefore, the case relied upon by the Detaining Authority is not similar case to the case of the detenu herein. Further, the present case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Alagu vs The State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 976 : (2026) SCC 976. Further, it is seen that the document furnished at Page No.91 of the booklet has also not been furnished in vernacular language to the detenue, despite a representation was made on 31.12.2025. Therefore, the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Powanammal vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (1999) 2 SCC 413 squarely applies to the case on hand. Hence, on these two grounds, the impugned detention order is liable to be set aside.
In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in Cr.M.P.No.28 of 2025, dated 11.12.2025, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Abdul Azees, son of Kalifathullah, aged about 25 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.