Alumalu v. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Sunder Mohan J.) The mother of the detenu – Manikandan @ Sara Paambu, S/o.Vengadraman, aged 32 years, has filed this petition challenging the detention order dated 28.11.2025, branding him as a 'Goonda' under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act, 1982 (Act 14/1982). Page3 of 7

¶2Heard the learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) for the respondents.

¶3It is seen from the impugned order and the grounds of detention that the detenu was arrested on 24.10.2025 and he was detained on

28.11.2025. The respondents have not satisfactorily explained the delay in passing the order of detention either in the grounds of detention or in the counter affidavit. We are of the view that in view of the delay, the live and proximate link between grounds of detention and the purpose of detention, is snapped. In this regard, we may rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura', reported in '2022 SCC OnLine SC 1333' and the relevant paragraph reads as follows: "21. It is manifestly clear from a conspectus of the above decisions of this Court, that the underlying principle is that if there is unreasonable delay between the date of the order of detention & actual arrest of the detenu and in the same manner from the date of the proposal and passing of the order of detention, such delay unless satisfactorily explained throws a considerable doubt on the genuineness of the requisite subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority in passing the detention order and consequently render the detention order bad and invalid because the "live and Page4 of 7 proximate link" between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention is snapped in arresting the detenu. A question whether the delay is unreasonable and stands unexplained depends on the facts and circumstances of each case."

¶4Drawing inspiration from the judgment in Sushanta Kumar Banik's case, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of 'Gomathi Vs. Principal Secretary to Government and Others', reported in '2023 SCC OnLine Mad 6332', had held that when there is an inordinate delay from the date of arrest/date of proposal till the order of detention, the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of detention would stand snapped.

¶5In yet another case i.e., in 'Nagaraj Vs. State of Tamil Nadu', reported in '(2018) 3 MWN (Cri) 428', this Court had held that the delay of 36 days in passing the detention order after the arrest of the detenu would snap the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of detention. Hence, in view of the unexplained and inordinate delay in passing the order of detention, after the arrest of the detenu, the detention order in the present case, is liable to be quashed. Page5 of 7

¶6In light of the above discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in No.43/2025 dated 28.11.2025 is set aside.

7.The detenu, viz., Manikandan @ Sara Paambu, S/o.Vengadraman, aged 32 years, now confined in Central Prison – II, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066, 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.) 27-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Note: Issue order copy today. dk Page6 of 7 To

¶1The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Prohibition and Excise (Home), Fort St.George, Chennai – 600009.

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

¶3The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.

¶4The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶5The Inspector of Police, C-1, Uthukottai Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

6.The Joint Secretary, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

7.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. HCPoNo.864oofo2026 DR.ANITAoSUMANTH,oJ. AND SUNDERoMOHAN,oJ. dk HCPoNo.o864oofo2026 27-07-2026 Page7oofo7

Page1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Alumalu W/o.Vengatraman, No.63/1, Gandhi Street, Uthukottai & Taluk, Tiruvallur District. Pin : 602026. ...Petitioner/Mother of the detenue Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Prohibition and Excise (Home), Fort St.George, Chennai – 600009. 2. The District Magistrate and District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur. 4. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. Page2 of 7 5. The Inspector of Police, C-1, Uthukottai Police Station, Tiruvallur District. ...Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records in No.43/2025 dated 28.11.2025 on the file of second respondent herein and set aside the same as illegal and produce the detenue Manikandan @ Sara Paambu, Son of Vengadraman, aged about 32 years, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner: No Appearance For Respondents: Mr.A.Amarnath, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)