Selvi v. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by Additional Chief Secretary to Government

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Sunder Mohan J.) The mother of the detenu-Karthi @ Motta Karthi, branded as 'Drug Offender' under Section 2(e) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, has filed this petition challenging the detention order dated 30.08.2025.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order of detention has to be set aside for the reason that the Government Order delegating the power of detention to the 2nd respondent herein has not been translated in Tamil; and that the special report of the sponsoring authority is undated, thereby denying the detenu to make an effective representation against the detention order.

¶4Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who would fairly concede that the translated version of the Government Order was not furnished to the detenu and the special report of the sponsoring authority is undated.

¶5It is seen from the booklet furnished to the detenu that the Government Order has not been translated in Tamil, while other documents were translated in Tamil, which is the language known to the detenu. It is well settled that if the document is not furnished in the language known to the detenu, his right to make effective would be denied. In 'Powanammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu' reported in '(1999) 2 SCC 413', the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that non-supply of documents in the language known to the detenu renders the detenu's detention illegal.

¶6That apart, we find that the special report of the sponsoring authority is undated. The compelling necessity to detain the detenu would depend on the date on which the sponsoring authority has sent his report. In the absence of the said date, the special report would become irrelevant and the compelling necessity to detain the detenu becomes doubtful.

¶7Further in 'Rekha Vs. State of Tamil Nadu through Secretary to Government and another' reported in '2011 [5] SCC 244', the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that where the detention order is passed on any irrelevant material, then, the detention order is liable to be quashed. Therefore, we are of the view that for both the aforesaid reasons the impugned detention order is liable to be set aside.

8.Accordingly, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in Detention Order in.Cr.M.P.No.50/DRUG OFFENDER/2025 C1 dated 30.08.2025 is set aside.

9.The detenu, viz., Karthi alias Motta Karthi, S/o. Saravanan aged 23 years, now confined in Central Prison, Coimbatore, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his presence is required in connection with any other case. (A.S.M.,J.) (S.M.,J.) 24-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order ars To

¶1The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶2The District Magistrate and District Collector Erode District, Erode.

¶3The Superintendent of Police Erode District, Erode.

¶4The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison, Coimbatore.

¶5The Inspector of Police Erode Town Police Station, Erode.

¶6The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. HCPoNo.o1975oofo2025 DR.ANITAoSUMANTH,oJ. AND SUNDERoMOHAN,oJ. ars HCPoNo.o1975oofo2025 24-03-2026 Pageo6oofo6

2026:MHC:1193 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Selvi ..Petitioner Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep by Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The District Magistrate and District Collector Erode District, Erode. 3.The Superintendent of Police Erode District, Erode. 4.The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison, Coimbatore. 5.The Inspector of Police Erode Town Police Station, Erode. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Habeas Corpus petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus or direction in the nature of the detention order dated 30.08.2025 passed by the second respondent in his proceedings No.Cr.M.P.No.50/DRUG OFFENDER/2025 C1 and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner son namely Karthi @ Motta Karthi, Son of Saravanan aged about 23 years, who is presently under going detention in the Central Prison, Coimbatore, as Drug Offender before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith. For Petitioner: Mr.C.S.Saravanan For Respondent(s): Mr. R. Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor assisted By Mr. M. Sylvester John