Selvi v. The Secretary To The Government,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.08.2019 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. NIRMAL KUMAR H.C.P. No.946 of 2019 Selvi ... Petitioner -vs1.The Secretary to Govt, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009 2.District Collector & District Magistrate, Vellore District, Vellore.
... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent 07.05.2019 in Memo No.C3/D.O.No.37/2019 against the petitioner's son Balaraman @ Bala, Male, aged 24 years, S/o. Palani, who is confined at Central Prison, Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balaji For Respondents : Mr.C.Iyyappa Raj Addl.Public Prosecutor
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] The petitioner is the mother of the detenu, Balaraman @ Bala, Male, aged 24 years, S/o. Palani. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Memo No.C3/D.O.No.37/2019 dated 07.05.2019, holding to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
2.We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.
3.The main argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the case relied on by the detaining authority is not similar in nature and the offences in the ground case are totally different and there is no reference about the bail application filed in the adverse cases. Therefore, the likelihood of the detenu coming out on bail is not there and the subjective satisfaction arrived by the detaining authority is not proper.
4.For appreciating the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the relevant averments in para 5 of the grounds of detention are extracted below: "5.I am aware that Thiru Balaraman @ Bala has not filed any bail application before any court in ground case in Katpadi Police station Crime No.192/2019 u/s 341, 294(b), 323, 307, 392, 397, 506(ii) IPC r/w Section 3 Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act 1992. As far as the ground case is concerned, in a similar case registered at Vellore North Crime police station Cr.No.200/2017, under Section 294(b), 394, 397, 506(ii) IPC bail was granted to the accused Thiru. Nandhu @ Nandhakumar by the Court of the Principal District Judge, Vellore in Crl.M.P.No.2714/2017 on 07.07.2017. As bail are being granted by courts in such cases, there is most likely that he (Thiru.Balaraman @ Bala) may coming out of bail, by filing any bail application in any court. If he comes out on bail, he will indulge in further activities, which will be prejudicial to be maintenance of public order......."
5.From a perusal of the detention order, it is seen that the detaining authority has taken into consideration in a similar case, registered at Vellore North Crime police station Cr.No.200/2017, under Sections 294(b), 394, 397, 506(ii) IPC bail was granted to the accused Thiru. Nandhu @ Nandhakumar by the Court of the Principal District Judge, Vellore in Crl.M.P.No.2714/2017 on 07.07.2017 and therefore, there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail and indulge in such activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The similar case relied on by the authority was registered for the offences under Sections 294(b), 394, 397, 506(ii) IPC whereas the offences involved in the ground case are under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 307, 392, 397, 506(ii) IPC r/w Section 3 Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss)
Act 1992. Therefore, there is non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in not considering the similar case for arriving at subjective satisfaction. Hence the impugned order of detention is liable to be set aside.
6. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in Memo No.C3/D.O.No.37/2019 dated 07.05.2019, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Balaraman @ Bala, S/o. Palani, male, aged about 24 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(J) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi/ssm To 1.The Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009 2.The District Collector & District Magistrate, Vellore District, Vellore.
3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
5.The Joint Secretary to Govt., Public (Law & Order) Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
H.C.P. No.946 of 2019 (CO) CB(04/10/2019)