Suganya v. The State Rep. by Its Government of Tamilnadu, Rep. by Its

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by N.Sathish Kumar J.) The order of detention passed by the second respondent in No.15/BBCDEFGISSSV/2026 dated 09.01.2026 is sought to be quashed in the present Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶2We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records submitted by the detaining authority.

¶3Though 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 Page3 of 6 subjective satisfaction regarding imminent possibility of detenu being enlarged on bail while passing the impugned order of detention.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detenu was arrested and remanded to judicial custody in connection with the ground case but the detenu has not moved any bail application in respect of the ground case and therefore, there is no real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in the near future, however, 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 in Crl.O.P.No.30749 of 2024.

¶5In this regard, the learned counsel drew the attention of this Court to the order in Crl.M.P.No.30749 of 2024, which is enclosed at Page No.161 of Volume II of the booklet. A careful perusal of the said order, brings to light that the facts of the said case is totally different as that of the instant case. Therefore, taking the said bail order as the basis for arriving at subjective satisfaction regarding the imminent possibility of detenu being enlarged on bail is clearly vitiated. Therefore, the impugned preventive detention order deserves to be dislodged. Page4 of 6

¶6In the result, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the detention order passed by the second respondent in No.15/BBCDEFGISSSV/2026 dated

09.01.2026 is hereby set aside. The detenu viz., Vicky @ Gundu Vicky @ Vickyrai, S/o. Sekar, Male, aged about 33 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.) 18-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SSI Note to Office: Registry to communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, forthwith. Page5 of 6 To:

¶1The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its The Additional Chief Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶2The Commissioner of Police, Greater chennai.

¶3The Superintendent of Prison, central prison, puzhal, Chennai District.

¶4The Inspector of Police, (L and O) H-8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai District.

¶5The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. HCPoNo.o446oofo2026 N.SATHISHoKUMAR,oJ. AND K.RAJASEKAR,oJ. SSI HCPoNo.o446oofo2026 18-08-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Suganya W/o.Vickyrai, No.109, 22nd block, sunami quarters, Ennore, Chennai District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Rep. by its. Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its The Additional Chief Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai District. 4. The Inspector of Police, (L and O) H-8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai District. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records in detention order passed in No.15/BBCDEFGISSSV/2026 dated 09.01.2026 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and quash the same and Page2 of 6 direct the respondents herein to produce the person or body of my husband Thiru.VICKY @ GUNDU VICKY @ VICKYRAI, S/o.Sekar, M/S 33 Years, now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.VIJAYAKUMAR For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)