R.Yasodha v. The Additional Chief Secretary To Governmnet
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.01.2023 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH H.C.P.No.1306 of 2022 R.Yasodha W/o.Ramesh .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.
3.The Inspector of Police, J-6 Thiruvanmiyur Police Station, Chennai District.
4.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
.. Respondents 1/6
Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 24.05.2022 in BCDFGISSSV No.128/2022 against the petitioner's son Dinesh S/o.Ramesh, aged about 24 years, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner :
Mr.K.Kandhan For Respondents :
Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor *****
ORDER
[Made by N.ANAND VENKATESH, J] The petitioner is the mother of the detenu viz., Dinesh S/o.Ramesh, aged about 24 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in BCDFGISSSV No.128/2022 dated 24.05.2022, 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.
2/6
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 learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detaining authority after being aware of the fact that the detenu has not moved any bail application, had come to the conclusion that there is likelihood of the detenu coming out on bail by relying upon an order passed in Crl.M.P.No.10485/2021. Learned counsel submitted that the order relied upon by the detaining authority is not a similar case. Hence, the detention order suffers from non-application of mind.
4. We have carefully gone through the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.10485/2021, which was relied upon by the detaining authority to come to the conclusion that that there is likelihood of the detenu coming out on bail. In the said order, no serious objections were raised by the Public Prosecutor for granting bail to the accused therein. That apart, the Court also took into consideration that accused therein suffered incarceration for 3/6
sufficient number of days. Hence, the order relied upon by the detaining authority cannot be held to be a similar case and hence, it reflects nonapplication of mind. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in BCDFGISSSV No.128/2022 dated 24.05.2022 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Dinesh S/o.Ramesh, aged about 24 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
[P.N.P., J] [N.A.V., J] 04.01.2023 Index: Yes/No gm To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.
4/6
3.The Inspector of Police, J-6 Thiruvanmiyur Police Station, Chennai District.
4.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
5.The Joint Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public, Law and Order Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.
6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
5/6
P.N.PRAKASH, J and N.ANAND VENKATESH, J gm H.C.P.No.1306 of 2022 04.01.2023 6/6