High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 11 MAD CK 1644

Malathi vs The Additional Chief Secretary To Government & Ors.

Madras High Court · Decided on 4 November 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J · B.Karthikeyan, J
CASE NUMBER
HCP.No.1972 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 391 words

(Made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.)

The petitioner is the mother of the detenu, viz., Dinesh, son of Pandiyan, aged about 24 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in BBCDEFGISSSV No.25/2026, dated 20.01.2026, holding him to be a "Drug Offender" as contemplated under Section 2(e) of the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act,1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982). The said order is under challenge in this habeas corpus petition.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detaining authority, while relying on another case stating it to be a similar case, inferred that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. He further submitted that the order relied upon by the detaining authority is the order dated 15.12.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1842 of 2020 in respect of Crime No.476 of 2020, by the learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court under EC & NDPS Act, Chennai. In that case, there is no reference to any previous case pending against the accused therein, whereas, as far as the case of the detenu herein is concerned, he has nine previous cases. Therefore, it cannot be taken as a similar case. Hence, he prayed to set aside the impugned detention order.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

4.

On a perusal of the materials available on record, it is seen that the case relied upon by the detaining authority to infer that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail, is not similar to the case of the detenu herein. Therefore, the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority is a mere ipse dixit. 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. Therefore, we are inclined to interfere with the impugned order.

5.

In the result, this Habeas Corpus Petition stands allowed and the order of detention in BBCDEFGISSSV No.25/2026, dated 20.01.2026, passed by the second respondent, is set aside. The detenu, viz., Dinesh, son of Pandiyan, aged about 24 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.