Nirmal Singh v. 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 Memo No.1021/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025 dated 04.12.2025 is sought to be quashed in the present Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶2Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

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

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detenue was arrested and remanded to judicial custody in connection with the ground 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 27.07.2023 in Crl.MP No.5272 of 2023 wherein statutory bail was granted to the accused therein.

¶5In this regard, the learned counsel drew the attention of this Court to order in Crl.MP No.5272 of 2023, which is enclosed at Page No.17 of Volume II 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 detenue being enlarged on bail shows clear non-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 in Memo No.1021/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025, dated 04.12.2025 is hereby set aside. The detenu Thiru.Dhanjay Singh, S/o.Krishna Singh, aged about 35 years, is Page4 of 6 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.) 14-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order ssi/ stn Note to Office: Registry to communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, forthwith. Page5 of 6 To

¶1Government of Tamilnadu, rep by its, The Additional Chief Secretary of Government, 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, PEW-Madhavaram, Chennai District. Page6 of 6

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. AND

K.RAJASEKAR, J. ssi/ stn 14-08-2026

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Nirmal Singh S/o.Krishna Singh, Nawadih Village, Chungru Post, Latchar District, Jharkhand State. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Government of Tamilnadu, rep by its, The Additional Chief Secretary of Government, 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 PEW-Madhavaram, Chennai District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in Detention order passed in Memo No.1021/BBCDEFGISSSV/2025 dated 04.12.2025 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to produce the Person of petitioner's elder brother Thiru.Dhanjay Singh Aged 35 years, S/o.Krishna Singh now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai District before this Hon'ble Court and set him Page2 of 6 at liberty and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioner(s): Mr. D.Padmanabhan For Respondent(s): Mr. M. Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) *******