Hemalatha v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.11.2016
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.BASKARAN H.C.P.No.1200 of 2016 Hemalatha .. Petitioner/Wife of the Detenue Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep by the Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George,Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai-7.
.. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, to call for the entire records leading to the detention of the petitioner's husband Babu @ Siva, son of Karra Angaiya, aged about 37 years has been detained under Act 14/82 as a Goonda vide detention order, dated 1.6.2016, on the file of the second respondent, in Memo No.521/BCDFGISSSV/2016, and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the said detenu before this court and to set him at liberty from the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajavelu For Respondents : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentran, APP
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN,J] This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the wife of the detenu, namely, Babu @ Siva, aged about 37 years, son of Karra Angaiya, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records, in No.521/ BCDFGISSSV/2016, dated 1.6.2016, passed by the second respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 3
(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), branding him as a "Goonda", in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, and to quash the same and to direct the Respondents to produce the body of the detenu and to set him at liberty, forthwith.
2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and we have also perused the records, carefully.
3. Though several grounds have been raised in this Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has assailed the impugned detention order mainly on the ground that the detaining authority had stated, in paragraph No.4 of the order of detention, that the detenu is in remand in T-10 Thirumullaivoyal police station Crime Nos.24/2016, 601/2016 and 632/2016 and he has moved bail applications, before the court concerned, in respect of the above said crime numbers. But those bail applications had been dismissed. It had been further stated in the detention order that the relatives of the detenu are taking steps to take him out on bail, in T-10, Thirumullaivoyal police station Crime Nos.24/2016, 601/2016 and 632/2016, by filing another bail applications before the appropriate Court. It had also been pointed out that no statements had been recorded from the relatives of the detenu with regard to the claim that they are taking steps to move a bail application, on behalf of the detenu and no such statements had been furnished to the detenu.
4. The said submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had not been refuted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents.
5. It is noted from the records available that no statements had been recorded from the relatives concerned to
substantiate the claim that they are taking steps to move bail applications on behalf of the detenu, to take him out on bail, in the above said cases. In such circumstances, we find that there is non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority, in passing the detention order. Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the detention order.
6. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned detention order, dated 1.6.2016, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu is directed to be released, forthwith, unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vvk To 1.The Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George,Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai-7.
3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
4.The Joint Secretary To Government, Public (Laws & Orders) Fort Saint Geroge, Chennai-9.
5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
pvs(CO) rs(09/01/2017) H.C.P.No.1200 of 2016