Gracy v. The Secretary To The

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 31.03.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU H.C.P.No.2733 of 2015 Gracy ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Secretary to the Govt., Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Police, Chennai.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS to call for the records in connection with the order of Detention passed by the 2nd respondent dated 30.09.2015 in BCDFGISSSV No. 1071/2015 against the son of the petitioner, detenu Vinoth M/A 25, S/o. Sanjaiah, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and to set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce the detenu before the Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.S. Kaviarasu For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by M. JAICHANDREN,J.] This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed, by the mother of the detenu, namely, Vinoth, S/o. Sanjaiah, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records, relating to the detention order in BCDFGISSSV No. 1071/2015 dated 30.09.2015, passed by the 2nd Respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982, branding him as a "Goonda", in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, and to set

aside the same and to direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and we have also perused the records carefully.

3. Though, several grounds have been raised in this Habeas Corpus Petition, Mr.K.S. Kaviarasu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, had assailed the impugned detention order mainly on the ground that the detaining authority had stated, in Paragraph No.4 of the order of detention, that no bail applications had been filed by the detenu, in respect of Crime Nos. 464/2014, 875/2014, 795/2014 and 922/2015 on the file of V-6, Kolathur Police Station. However, in the detention order, it had been stated that the relatives of the detenu are taking action to take him out on bail, in Crime Nos. 464/2014, 875/2014, 795/2014 and 922/2015 on the file of V-6, Kolathur Police Station by filing bail applications before the appropriate Court.

4. It is noted from the records available that no statements had been recorded from the relatives concerned to substantiate the claim that they are taking steps to move bail application, on behalf of the detenu, to take him out on bail, in the above said cases. In such circumstances, we find that there is non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority, in passing the detention order. Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the detention order.

5.Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned detention order, dated 30.09.2015, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu is directed to be released forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar nv

To 1.The Secretary to the Govt., Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Police, Chennai.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai 66.

4.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public(Law & Order), Fort Saint George, Chennai - 9.

5.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

H.C.P. No. 2733 of 2015 CA(CO) CA(05/05/2016)