Begin typing your search...

    Constitution equal to both good & bad, says Madras HC; asks govt to pay history sheeter held under Goondas Act

    Referring to Article 21 of the Constitution, no person can be deprived of his life or personal liberty, wrote Justice N Anand Venkatesh while allowing a petition moved by R Eswaran, seeking compensation for his illegal detention

    Constitution equal to both good & bad, says Madras HC; asks govt to pay history sheeter held under Goondas Act
    X

    Madras High Court (File)

    CHENNAI: The Constitution of India does not distinguish between a good person and bad person, the Madras High Court observed while directing the State to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation to a history-sheeter who was detained illegally under the Tamil Nadu Goondas Act.

    Referring to Article 21 of the Constitution, no person can be deprived of his life or personal liberty, wrote Justice N Anand Venkatesh while allowing a petition moved by R Eswaran, seeking compensation for his illegal detention.

    The judge held that the State had illegally detained the petitioner even though the advisory board found no justification in detaining him and ordered to pay Rs 50,000 to the petitioner as compensation.

    The petitioner, Eswaran, claimed that he was detained under the Goondas act from November 23, 2021, to March 17, 2022, pursuant to the order of the Dindigul collector.

    Advocate S Karthik, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the advisory board declared there was no cause shown justifying the petitioner's detention and it was approved by the Home Prohibition and Excise department on January 4, 2022. However, the State detained the petitioner till March 17, 2022, which was an illegal detention; hence, he should be compensated.

    Additional Advocate General (AAG) Veera Kathiravan submitted that due process had to be completed before the petitioner was to be released, and it took some time to complete the process, hence there is no question of illegal detention. The AAG objected to the compensation claim citing the petitioner is a history-sheeter.

    Rejecting the AAG's submission, the judge held that "No law can say that only a paragon of virtues can be paid compensation and others are not entitled to the same.” Such a stand of the State is wholly unsustainable and violates the fundamental right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, the bench wrote.

    DTNEXT Bureau
    Next Story