- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Madras High Court
- /
- Intimation Of Arrest Through SMS...
Intimation Of Arrest Through SMS Hampers Constitutional Safeguard Of Effective Representation: Madras High Court Quashes Detention Order
Upasana Sajeev
21 May 2023 3:07 PM GMT
The Madras High Court recently set aside a detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Avadi City on the ground that the intimation of arrest of the detenue made through an SMS which was improper.The division bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice Nirmal Kumar observed that the right of the detenu to make effective representation is a constitutional safeguard ingrained in Article...
The Madras High Court recently set aside a detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Avadi City on the ground that the intimation of arrest of the detenue made through an SMS which was improper.
The division bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice Nirmal Kumar observed that the right of the detenu to make effective representation is a constitutional safeguard ingrained in Article 22 of the Constitution and this right was hampered in the present case since the intimation was not made in a proper manner.
"In this case, the arrest intimation is through Short Message Service (SMS). The reason given is not acceptable, proper intimation has to be given to the detenu and the detenu must know the reason for his arrest. Further, right of the detenu to make an effective representation qua the preventive detention order is a constitutional safeguard ingrained in Clause (5) of Article 22 of the Constitution of India. In the light of the narrative thus far, this constitutional safeguard is hampered. The sequitur is, the impugned preventive detention order deserves to be dislodged," the court observed.
The court was dealing with a plea moved by the wife of a man who was detained under The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyberlaw offenders, Drug-offenders, Forest offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic offenders, Sand-offenders, Sexual-offenders, Slum-grabbers, and Video Pirates Act 1982 on the premise that the detenu was a “Goonda”.
The petitioner challenged the detention order on the ground that though it had been stated that wife of the detenu was intimated through SMS about the arrest but there was no material to support the same. On the other hand, the authorities submitted that the information was based on the details provided by the detenu.
The court, after perusing the materials, agreed with the petitioners and found that there was no material to show that the phone number belonged to the petitioner. The court relied on its earlier decisions in Akilandeswari Vs. State and Ganesh @ Lingesan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and another where the court has repeatedly upheld the right of the detenu to be intimated about the arrest for effective representation.
The court thus quashed the detention order and directed the detenu to be released and be set at liberty.
Case Title: Harini v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 145
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.Gayathri for Mr.P.Chandrasekar
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor
