M.Sangeetha v. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government,

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by N.Sathish Kumar J.) The petitioner, who is the wife of the detenu V.Murugavel, male S/o.Venkatesan, aged 42 years, has come forward with this petition challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 15.12.2025 bearing reference BBCDEFGISSSV No.174/2025 slapped on her husband, branding him as "Drug Offender" under 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].

¶2Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents. Page3 of 6

3.Though several grounds have been raised by the petitioner in the habeas corpus petition assailing the detention order, in the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his argument only with regard to non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in arriving at the subjective satisfaction regarding imminent possibility of detenu being enlarged on bail while passing the impugned order of detention.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detenu was arrested and remanded to judicial custody in connection with the one ground case and one adverse case and the detaining authority while passing the impugned detention order arrived at the subjective satisfaction regarding imminent possibility of coming out on bail by relying on a bail order dated

28.11.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.9007 of 2023 wherein statutory bail was granted to Uttam Kumar Bishoyi and another.

¶5In this regard, the learned counsel drew the attention this Court to order in Crl.M.P.No.9007 of 2023, which is enclosed at Page No. 123 of Volume I of the booklet. A careful perusal of the said order, brings to light that it is a case of statutory bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, taking a default bail order as a basis for arriving at subjective satisfaction regarding the imminent possibility of detenu being enlarged on bail shows clear non-Page4 of 6 application of mind. Therefore, the impugned preventive detention order deserves to be dislodged.

¶6In the result, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 15.12.2025 in BBCDEFGISSSV No.174/2025 is hereby set aside. The detenu viz., V.Murugavel, male S/o.Venkatesan, aged 42 years, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless he is required in connection with any other case. (N.S.K.,J.) (K.R.S.,J.) 13-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order gpa Page5 of 6 To

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

¶2The Commissioner of Police, Tambaram City, Office of the Commissioner of Police Sholinganallur, Chennai.

¶3The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶4The Inspector of Police, T-15, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

¶5The Joint Secretary to Government Public (Law & Order) Fort Saint George, Chennai – 9

¶6The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. HCPoNo.o265oofo2026 N.SATHISHoKUMAR,oJ. AND K.RAJASEKAR,oJ. gpa HCPoNo.o265oofo2026 13-08-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR M.Sangeetha W/o.Murugavel, ..Petitioner(s) Vs. 1. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai - 600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Tambaram City, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Sholinganallur, Chennai. 3. The State Rep. by the Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. 4. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, T-15, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Chennai. ..Respondent(s) Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other order or direction in the nature of writ, call for the records pertaining to the order of detention passed by Page2 of 6 the second respondent in his proceedings in No.174/BCDFGISSSV/2025 dated 15.12.2025 and quash the same as illegal and produce the detenue, namely V.Murugavel, S/o.Venkatesan, aged 42 years, as DRUG OFFENDER, now he is confined in Central Prison, Puzhal II before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner(s): Mr.C.Vignesh For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Government Advocate (Crl.side)