HCP No. 981 of 2026 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 HCP No. 981 of 2026 Jemena W/o. Ismail, Ashok Nagar 4th Cross, Pachapatty, Kitchipalayam, Salem. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. State Rep by The Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.Gorge, Chennai-9. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Salem City. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem. 4. The Inspector of Police, Karipatty Police Station, Salem. ..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 C.M.P.No.115/Goonda/Salem City/2025 Dated 17.12.2025 on the file __________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 off the Commissioner of Police, Salem City, the second respondent herein and quash the same as illigal and direct the respondent to produce the detenue Mohammed Riyaz@Kittu, S/o. Ismail, aged about 23 years, now confined at Central Prison, Salem, before this Hon’ble Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner(s): M/s.S.Sengkodi For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER (Order of the Court was made by N.Sathish Kumar J.)

The order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings in C.M.P.No.115/Goonda/Salem City/2025, dated 17.12.2025 is sought to be quashed in this Habeas Corpus Petition. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records submitted by the detaining authority. 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 passing the impugned order of detention. __________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detenu has been remanded to judicial custody in connection with ground case and he has not moved any bail application and therefore, there is no real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in the near future. However, the detaining authority after quoting that the detenu has not filed any bail application, but by relying on a case registered in Crime No.197/2019 for the offence under Section 302 IPC, altered to Sections 147, 148, 392 IPC, wherein bail has been granted by the Principal Sessions Judge, Salem in C.M.P.No.107 of 2019, dated 08.01.2020 to the accused concerned, has come to the conclusion that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) while reiterating the averments in the counter affidavit submits that the order of detention has been passed on cogent and sufficient materials and the same cannot be interfered with at the instance of the petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made by both sides, this Court is of the considered view that there is non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority while passing the impugned order. Admittedly, in the ground case and two adverse cases, no bail application has been filed by the detenu or by his relatives so far. If that be so, the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority that there is real possibility of his coming out on __________ Page3 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 bail would be mere ipse dixit and that would vitiate the order of detention. It is a trite law that when no bail application is pending, it is only a logical conclusion that there is no likelihood of the person in custody would be released on bail. There are no materials available to show that a bail application is being moved, on behalf of the detenu, either by his relatives or by any other person, to take him out on bail. Thus, there is no real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. Therefore, the conclusion of the detaining authority that there is a possibility of the detenu coming out on bail shows his non application of mind while passing the detention order. In such view of the matter, the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed. 7. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in C.M.P.No.115/Goonda/Salem City/2025 Dated 17.12.2025 is set aside. The detenu, namely Mohammed Riyaz @ Kittu, S/o. Ismail, Male, aged 23 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention 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 Neutral Citation: Yes/No SSI Note to Office: Registry to communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Salem, forthwith. __________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 To:

1. State Rep by The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.Gorge, Chennai-9. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Salem City. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem. 4. The Inspector of Police, Karipatty Police Station, Salem. 5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. __________ Page5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. AND K.RAJASEKAR, J. SSI HCP No. 981 of 2026 14-08-2026 __________ Page6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

HCP No. 981 of 2026 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 HCP No. 981 of 2026 Jemena W/o. Ismail, Ashok Nagar 4th Cross, Pachapatty, Kitchipalayam, Salem. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. State Rep by The Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.Gorge, Chennai-9. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Salem City. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem. 4. The Inspector of Police, Karipatty Police Station, Salem. ..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 C.M.P.No.115/Goonda/Salem City/2025 Dated 17.12.2025 on the file __________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 off the Commissioner of Police, Salem City, the second respondent herein and quash the same as illigal and direct the respondent to produce the detenue Mohammed Riyaz@Kittu, S/o. Ismail, aged about 23 years, now confined at Central Prison, Salem, before this Hon’ble Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner(s): M/s.S.Sengkodi For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER (Order of the Court was made by N.Sathish Kumar J.)

The order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings in C.M.P.No.115/Goonda/Salem City/2025, dated 17.12.2025 is sought to be quashed in this Habeas Corpus Petition. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records submitted by the detaining authority. 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 passing the impugned order of detention. __________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detenu has been remanded to judicial custody in connection with ground case and he has not moved any bail application and therefore, there is no real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in the near future. However, the detaining authority after quoting that the detenu has not filed any bail application, but by relying on a case registered in Crime No.197/2019 for the offence under Section 302 IPC, altered to Sections 147, 148, 392 IPC, wherein bail has been granted by the Principal Sessions Judge, Salem in C.M.P.No.107 of 2019, dated 08.01.2020 to the accused concerned, has come to the conclusion that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) while reiterating the averments in the counter affidavit submits that the order of detention has been passed on cogent and sufficient materials and the same cannot be interfered with at the instance of the petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made by both sides, this Court is of the considered view that there is non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority while passing the impugned order. Admittedly, in the ground case and two adverse cases, no bail application has been filed by the detenu or by his relatives so far. If that be so, the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority that there is real possibility of his coming out on __________ Page3 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 bail would be mere ipse dixit and that would vitiate the order of detention. It is a trite law that when no bail application is pending, it is only a logical conclusion that there is no likelihood of the person in custody would be released on bail. There are no materials available to show that a bail application is being moved, on behalf of the detenu, either by his relatives or by any other person, to take him out on bail. Thus, there is no real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. Therefore, the conclusion of the detaining authority that there is a possibility of the detenu coming out on bail shows his non application of mind while passing the detention order. In such view of the matter, the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed. 7. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in C.M.P.No.115/Goonda/Salem City/2025 Dated 17.12.2025 is set aside. The detenu, namely Mohammed Riyaz @ Kittu, S/o. Ismail, Male, aged 23 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention 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 Neutral Citation: Yes/No SSI Note to Office: Registry to communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Salem, forthwith. __________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 To:

1. State Rep by The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.Gorge, Chennai-9. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Salem City. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem. 4. The Inspector of Police, Karipatty Police Station, Salem. 5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. __________ Page5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HCP No. 981 of 2026 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. AND K.RAJASEKAR, J. SSI HCP No. 981 of 2026 14-08-2026 __________ Page6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis