Ramya, Age 24 Years v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.11.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR H.C.P. No.1631 of 2017 Ramya ... Petitioner -vs1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep.
By its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600009.
2.The Commissisoner of Police, Greater Chennai.
... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records of the second respondent herein pertaining to the detention order made in Memo No.382/BCDFGISSSV/2017 dated 24.06.2017 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body of the detenue David sonof Mohan aged 29 years, now detained in Central Prison, Puzhal, before this court and set the detenue at liberty forthwith. For Petitioner :
Mr. S. Sairaman For Respondents :
Mr. V.M.R. Rajentran Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.]
1. The petition seeks to challenge the Detention Order dated 24.06.2017. The petition has been moved by the wife of the detenue. In the impugned order reference is made to three
(3) adverse cases lodged against the detenue; these being: Cr.No.2608/2016, 2908/2016 and 691 of 2017.
2. In the first and second adverse cases referred to above, the detenue is accused of having committed an offence under Section 379 I.P.C., while in the third adverse case, the detenue is said to have committed an offence under Sections 457 and 380 of I.P.C.
3. Insofar as the subject case is concerned, it is
numbered as: Cr.No.848 of 2017. A perusal of the impugned order would show that it is passed without due application of mind. The detaining authority while noting that the bail application filed by the detenue in Cr.Nos.691 of 2017 and 848 of 2017 before the Principal District Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu is pending, has also recorded that subsequently though the Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram, qua Cr.No.691/2017 granted bail to the detenue on 22.06.2017, the detenue was unable to have himself enlarged on bail as he has not been able to furnish sureties.
4. Clearly, the apprehension that the detenue may get released, has not been unsubstantiated, as to date the detenue has not been able to furnish sureties, despite having obtained bail order on 22.06.2017 in Cr.No.691 of 2017.
5. Furthermore, the fact that, bail was granted in a similar case that cannot be basis of keeping the detenue in custody. It may also be noted that the order granting bail in Cr.No.384 of 2015 to the concerned accused has not been adverted to in the impugned order.
6. We also note the fact that while the detenue was arrested on 17.5.2017, the impugned order, as noted above, was passed on 24.06.2017 after a delay of more than one month. There is no material on record which would explain the delay in passing the impugned order.
7. For all these reasons, we are inclined to quash the impugned order. It is ordered accordingly.
8. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in BCDFGISSSV No.382/2017 dated 24.06.2017, passed by the 2nd respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Thiru. David, male, aged about 29 years, son of Tr. Mohan, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. Given the nature of the case, this order will be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent by the Registrar General of this Court via Fax.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ggs To:
1. The Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600009.
2. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public, Law and Order Department Secretariat, Chennai 6000009.
3.The Commissisoner of Police, Greater Chennai.
4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras.
5.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
H.C.P.No. 1631 of 2017 GN(01/11/2017)