'Article 21 Doesn't Distinguish Between Good Or Bad Person': Madras HC Orders ₹50K Compensation For Illegal Detention Of History-Sheeter

The Madras High Court recently directed the State Government to pay Rs. 50,000 compensation to a history sheeter for his illegal detention despite the Committee's report finding no sufficient cause for his detention. Though the state claimed that the history-sheeter was not entitled for compensation, Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution only uses the word 'person' and does not distinguish between a 'good person' or a 'bad person'. The court thus observed that no law could say that only a paragon of virtues could be paid compensation. “The fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India only uses the word “Person” and it does not distinguish between a good person and a bad person. No law can say that only a paragon of virtues can be paid compensation and others are not entitled for the same. Such stand taken by the respondents [state] is wholly unsustainable and it violates the fundamental right that has been given to a person under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the court said. The court was hearing a petition filed by R Eswaran seeking compensation of Rs. 10 Lakh for his illegal detention. Eswaran was detained under the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention Act by an order of the Dindigul District Collector on November 23, 2021. The Advisory Board, through an order dated December 30, 2021, concluded that no sufficient cause was shown for Easwaran's detention and opined to revoke the order of detention. However, the revocation order was passed only on March 14, 2022, and he was released on March 17, 2022. Thus, claiming that the detention from December 30 to March 17 was not backed by law, Easwaran moved the court for detention. The State, on the other hand, submitted that though the advisory board gave its opinion on December 30, the process took some time to be completed. The Additional Advocate General also submitted that there was no illegal detention. He also stressed that there were 25 previous cases against Easwaran and since he was a history sheeter, he was not entitled to any compensation. The court however was not satisfied with the State's submission and concluded that there was illegal detention. The court remarked that any detention must satisfy the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Thus, finding that Easwaran was illegally detained, the court concluded that he was entitled to compensation and ordered accordingly. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. S. Karthik Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. S. Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor Case Title: R. Eswaran v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 13 Case No: W.P.(MD)No.4804 of 2023Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

'Article 21 Doesn't Distinguish Between Good Or Bad Person': Madras HC Orders ₹50K Compensation For Illegal Detention Of History-Sheeter

Upasana Sajeev

Tags