Jayalakshmi v. Home, Prohibition And Excise Department
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.08.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM H.C.P.No.1447 of 2024 Jayalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.
1.
The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition & Excise (XVI) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
The Commissioner of Police, O/o. Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai.
The Superintendent of Prison, Special Prison for Women, Trichy District.
The Inspector of Police, P-6, Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records connected with the detention order in BCDFGISSS.No.463/2024 dated 07.05.2024 on the file of
the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body and person of petitioner daughter one named Tmt.Dharani w/o. Chandrasekar aged about 26 years now confined at Special Court for Women, Trichy before this Court and set him at liberty forwith. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Muthamizh Selvakumar For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) The impugned order of detention has been passed based on one criminal case registered under the Prohibition Law. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that in respect of Narcotic Drugs cases, no bail application has been filed on the file of the Principal Special Judge for Essential Commodities & Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substance Act Cases at Chennai. However, the bail application was filed in Crime No. 226 of 2024 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai. In the order of detention, it is projected as if the detenue filed
bail application before the Narcotic Drugs Court. Thus, there is no application of mind on the part of the Detaining Authority. The ground on which the impugned order of detention has been passed is based on irrelevant consideration. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to succeed. The very reliance placed on by the Detaining Authority that the petitioner has filed the bail application before the Narcotic Drugs Court seems to be incorrect. Therefore, the very basis for detention is not supported with the relevant materials.
5.
Accordingly, the impugned order of detention in proceedings No.463/BCDFGISSSV/2024 dated 07.05.2024 on the file of the 2nd respondent is quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition stands allowed. [S.M.S., J.] [V.S.G., J.] 06.08.2024 Index :
Yes/No Speaking Order :
Yes/No :
Yes/No veda
To 1.
The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition & Excise (XVI) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
The Commissioner of Police, O/o. Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai.
The Superintendent of Prison, Special Prison for Women, Trichy District.
The Inspector of Police, P-6, Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai District.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
veda H.C.P.No.1447 of 2024 06.08.2024