AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Chockalingam, J.—The grievance ventilated by the petitioner is that her husband is involved in criminal case and he is kept in solitary
confinement, which would be infringement of his fundamental rights enshrined under the Constitution of India. Under such circumstances, it is a fit
case to issue a writ of habeas corpus.
In answer to the above, it was contended by the learned Counsel appearing for the State that the detenu Saravanan @ Thiruttu Saravanan was
confined in Security Block-I where 42 prisoners were confined. Along with him, the other prisoners were in Cell. Numbers were also given. The
averments made by the petitioner that the detenu is solitarily confined is not correct.
In view of the statement made by the learned Counsel appearing for the State, the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the habeas
corpus petition as if the detenu is in solitary confinement cannot be accepted. The habeas corpus petition stands disposed of accordingly.