Rajiv, Age 45 Years, v. The State Rep. By Its Scretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 27.04.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH H.C.P No.2221 of 2016 Rajiv

...Petitioner/Father of the

detenue Vs

1. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By the Secretary to the Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009

2. The District Collector and the District Magistrate, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

....Respondents Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ, order or Direction in the nature of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling the second respondent to produce the records in connection with the order in SC.No.28/2016 dated 20.09.2016 and direct the respondents to produce the detenu namely Sasikumar, Male, aged about 23 years, son of Rajiv, now kept in Central Prison, Salem before this Hon'ble Court and Quash or set aside the same and set him liberty.

For Petitioner :

M/s.M.Selvam For respondents:

Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S. NAGAMUTHU,J.,) The petitioner, who is the father of the detenu Sasikumar, has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition, challenging the detention order passed against the detenu Sasikumar, by the second respondent, vide proceedings S.C.No.28/2016 dated 20.09.2016.

2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and we have also perused the records carefully.

3. Though, several grounds were raised in the petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would mainly focus on the ground that though bail application was filed in Crl M.P.No.1402/2016 before the Court of Principal Sessions Court, Dharmapuri in respect of Crime No.315/2016 on the Palacode Police Station and the same was dismissed on 24.08.2016. Again, a bail application was filed in Crl M.P.No.1522/2016 before the Court of Principal Sessions Court, Dharmapuri in respect of Crime No.315/2016 on the Palacode Police Station was also dismissed on 08.09.2016. There was no further bail application pending as on the date of passing of the detention order by the second respondent in Crime No.315/2016 and the detaining authority has stated that the relatives of the detenu were taking steps to file bail application, in which case there was real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. The learned counsel pointed out that to arrive at such a conclusion, there was no material placed before the detaining authority at all.

4. The learned Additional Public prosecutor would submit that in the Special report submitted by the Inspector of Police, there is a statement to the effect that the relatives of the detenu were taking steps to file bail application seeking bail in connection with the case in Crime No.315/2016.

5. We have considered the above submissions. Admittedly, as on the date of passing of the detention order, there was no application filed by the detenu seeking bail in Crime Nos.315/2016 on the file of Palacode Police Station. Though it is alleged that his relatives were taking steps to file an application for bail, there were no materials available before the detaining authority, except the report of the Inspector of Police. Even the report of the Inspector of Police does not

spell out as to how he came to know that the relatives were taking steps to file application seeking bail. Full details as to who are those relatives, who were taking steps to file bail application also have not been mentioned. Thus, in our considered view, without making proper application of mind relating to these facts, the detaining authority has passed the detention order. Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the same.

6.Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned detention order, dated 20.09.2016, 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 To

1. The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009

2. The District Collector and the District Magistrate, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai.

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

5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai. Order in H.C.P No.2221 of 2016 SDR 18.05.2017