(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ, order or direction particularly in the nature of WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS to produce the body of the petitioner’s father namely Mr.Khallelur Rahman who is detained in Central Prison, Puzhal before this Honourable Court and set him at liberty forthwith by calling for the records pursuant to the detention order dated 07.11.2025 made in Memo No.164/TNPD/APC/2025 passed by the 2nd respondent herein and quash the same and pass such further or other orders.)

Dr. Anita Sumanth, J.

1. The son of one Khaleelur Rahman (detenu) S/o Mohamed Musthafa, who was detained as a Goonda under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 (in short ‘Act’) has approached this Court challenging the order of detention dated 07.11.2025.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the impugned order of detention pointing out to various lacunae in the order, emphasizing that the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority that the detenu will be enlarged on bail is wholly misconceived.

3. We have heard Mr.M.Mohammed Saifulla, learned counsel for Mr.K.Anandha Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.R.Malarvannan, learned counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (criminal Side), learned counsel for the respondents.

4. We agree that the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority is vitiated for the reason that he relies upon an order passed in Crl.O.P.No.27950 of 2024 on 08.11.2024 passed by this Court. The detenu has moved a bail petition before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur in Crl.M.P.No.4634 of 2025 and the same is pending.

5. The inference that the detenu is likely to come out on bail is based on a comparison of the detenu’s case with the case of the accused in Crl.O.P.No.27950 of 2024. We have compared the offences allegedly committed by that accused with the offences in the present case and find that the offence committed in the relied upon case is under Section 103 of BNSS, whereas, in the present case, the offences are under Sections 103, 238 of BNSS and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST/(POA) Act.

6. Since the circumstances in the present matter are far graver, we find that the subjective satisfaction of the authority that the detenu may be enlarged on bail is misplaced, as the gravity of the offences in the present case would, no doubt, weigh with the authorities as and when the bail application filed by the detenu would be considered.

7. Hence, we find merit in the submission of the petitioner that the subjective satisfaction of the authority that bail would be granted, is nothing but mere ipse dixit.

8. In fact, we have accepted this point in HCP No.113 of 2026 vide order dated 20.07.2026 in the case of the co-detenu.

9. In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order passed by the second respondent in No.164/TNPD/APC/2025 dated 07.11.2025 is set aside.

10. The detenu, viz., Khaleelur Rahman, S/o.Mohamed Musthafa, male aged 59 years, who is now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.

11. In light of the aforesaid order, the Miscellaneous petition seeking to fix an early date for hearing of the HCP is closed.