Madras High Court Upholds Preventive Detention of Sexual Offender Despite Delay in Order

Court dismisses Habeas Corpus Petition, affirms detention for heinous offence against minor under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court's Madurai Bench upheld the preventive detention of Kannan, a 38-year-old man designated as a "Sexual Offender" under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, despite a 35-day delay in the issuance of the detention order. The decision came after the detenu's sister, C. Kayalvizhi, challenged the detention through a Habeas Corpus Petition, arguing that the delay and lack of a proximate link rendered the detention illegal.

The bench, comprising Justices G.K. Ilanthiraiyan and R. Poornima, found that the delay was sufficiently explained and justified given the heinous nature of the offence. Kannan was arrested on March 12, 2025, for committing a sexual offence against an 8-year-old minor, a crime registered under various sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 87 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The subsequent detention order was passed on April 17, 2025.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the delay in passing the detention order indicated a lack of a "live link" and that no bail application was pending when the order was issued, implying no risk of Kannan's release. However, the court referenced a precedent set in "Susamma Baby v. The Principal Secretary to Government," which established that neither the Constitution nor the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 mandates a specific timeframe for issuing a detention order, provided the delay is reasonably justified.

Furthermore, the court dismissed the argument regarding the non-provision of a translated accident register, stating that it was not a critical factor in the detention decision. The court also rejected the contention that a solitary incident does not justify preventive detention, emphasizing the societal impact of the offence against a minor as sufficient grounds for such action.

Ultimately, the court found no fault in the detaining authority's decision, affirming the detention as a necessary measure to maintain public order given the gravity of the offence. The Habeas Corpus Petition was thus dismissed, reinforcing the state's stance on addressing severe crimes against minors with stringent preventive measures.

Bottom Line:

Preventive detention of detenu as a "Sexual Offender" under Section 2(ggg) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 upheld, despite delay in detention order, when the explanation for delay is reasonable and the offence committed is serious and heinous in nature.

Statutory provision(s): Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 Section 2(ggg), Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 5(l), 5(m), 6(1), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 87

C.Kayalvizhi v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Madras)(Madurai Bench)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2819736