The Madras High Court has described preventive detention laws as draconian and warned State authorities against misuse of such powers to target political opponents or silence dissent. The court stressed that detention involves deprivation of personal liberty and demands restraint, care, and good faith from executive agencies.
A division bench comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice P. Dhanabal stated that preventive detention grants the executive power to imprison individuals without trial. The bench said this authority requires rare use and strict scrutiny. Any abuse, lack of bona fide intent, or reliance on extraneous considerations warrants serious judicial response.
The court held that detention orders issued in a routine or careless manner violate constitutional obligations. It directed that disciplinary action must follow if authorities use detention to settle political scores or suppress critical voices. The bench stated that the State must avoid approving detention orders mechanically.
The judges reaffirmed that personal liberty flows from the Constitution and does not depend on State discretion. Failure to protect this right leads to unconstitutionality. An affected citizen holds the right to seek relief, including damages, against the State and its officers.
The petition was filed by the wife of Varaaki, a YouTuber and investigative journalist detained under the Tamil Nadu Goondas Act.