Babu v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28.10.2020

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR H.C.P.NO.1759 OF 2020 Babu ... Petitioner -vsState rep. by

1. The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai - 9.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Salem City, Salem.

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem.

4. The Inspector of Police, Ammapet Police Station, Salem.

... Respondents Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus to call for the records in C.M.P.No.4/Goonda/Salem City/2020 dated 31.01.2020 on the file of the second respondent and quash the detention as illegal and direct the respondents to produce the detenu Thiru Seeni @ Srinivasan, S/o.Ramasamy, aged 32 years, now confined in Central Prison, Salem, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajanikanth For Respondents : Mr.R.Prathap Kumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] The petitioner is the friend of the detenu. The detenu - Seeni @ Srinivasan, S/o.Ramasamy, aged 32 years, has been

detained by the second respondent by his order in C.M.P.No.4/Goonda/Salem City/2020 dated 31.01.2020, holding him 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.Among other grounds, the detention order is mainly attacked on the ground that there is a delay in passing the order of detention. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strongly contended that though the detenu was arrested on 21.12.2019, the detention order was passed only on 31.01.2020 i.e., after a considerable delay of more than one month. Therefore, the detention order has to be set aside. 4.As seen from the grounds of detention, it is clear that though the detenu was arrested on 21.12.2019, the order of detention came to be passed only on 31.01.2020 and hence, there is an abnormal delay in passing the order of Detention, which caused prejudice to the interest of the detenu. 5.We have gone through the entire materials placed on record. There is no satisfactory explanation offered by the Detaining Authority for the delay in passing the order of detention. 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 C.M.P.No.4/Goonda/Salem City/2020 dated 31.01.2020, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Seeni @ Srinivasan, S/o.Ramasamy, aged 32 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi/ssm To

1. The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai - 9.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Salem City, Salem.

3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem.

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

5. The Inspector of Police, Ammapet Police Station, Salem.

6. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

H.C.P.No.1759 of 2020 SV(CO) CS/03/12/2020