Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Thanalakshmi vs The State Of Tamil Nadu And Others

Madras High Court|27 January, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.01.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN H.C.P.No.1627 of 2016 Thanalakshmi .. Petitioner Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep by its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai city Police, Commissioner Office, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS to call for the records relating to the impugned order, in BCDFGISSSV No.737/2016, dated 19.7.2016, on the file of the second respondent and to set aside the same, as illegal and to direct the respondents to produce the detenu Kotti @ Koteeswaran, son of Sathiyanarayanan, aged about 26 years, confined in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, before this court and to set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.Ilayaraja Kandasamy For Respondents : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN,J.) This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed, by the wife of the detenu, namely, Kotti @ Koteeswaran, aged about 26 years, son of Sathyanarayanan, praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records, in BCDFGISSSV No.737/2016, dated 19.7.2016, passed by the second Respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), branding him as a “Goonda”, in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, and to quash the same and to direct the Respondents to produce the body of the detenu and set him at liberty forthwith.
2 At this stage of the hearing of the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents would submit that the order of detention passed by the second respondent, against the husband of the petitioner, dated 19.7.2016, has been revoked by the Government, in G.O. Rt. No.4138, Home, Prohibition and Excise (X) Department, dated 31.8.2016 and he has also produced a copy of the said order.
3 Recording the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this petition is dismissed, as infructuous.
(M.J.,J.) (C.V.K., J.) 27. 01.2017 vvk To
1. The Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai city Police, Commissioner Office, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
M.JAICHANDREN,J.
and C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
vvk H.C.P.No.1627 of 2016 27.01.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Thanalakshmi vs The State Of Tamil Nadu And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
27 January, 2017
Judges
  • M Jaichandren
  • C V Karthikeyan