A.Karuppuswamy, v. The Principal Secretarty To
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 24.07.2017
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN H.C.P.No.2654 of 2016 A.Karuppuswamy S/o.Arumugam .. Petitioner Vs 1.The Principal Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Chennai - 600 009 2.The District Magistrate and District Collector Tiruppur District .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, to call for records of the detention made in order under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982, Cr.M.P.No.27/Goonda/2016 dated 05.10.2016 passed by the District Magistrate/District Collector, Tiruppur District and set aside the same and direct the 2nd respondent to produce the detenu before this Court ans set the detenu A.Karuppuswamy, S/o. Arumugam, aged about 24 years, confined at Central Prison, Coimbatore, at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr. B.Chandran For Respondents : Mr.J.Karuppiah Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to call for the records relating to the detention order passed in Cr.M.P.No.27/Goonda/2016 dated 05.10.2016, against the detenu by name, Karuppusamy, aged 24 years, son of Arumugam, Door No.2/16,
Moonu Cent, Kuthirambam, Erumadu Post, Pandhalur Taluk, Nilgiris District and quash the same.
2. The Inspector of Police, Dharapuram Police Station, as Sponsoring Authority, has submitted an affidavit to the Detaining Authority, wherein, it is averred that the detenu has involved in the following adverse cases:-
1. Dharapuram Police Station, Crime No.13/2016, registered under Sections 457 and 397 of Indian Penal Code;
2. Moolaur Police Station, Crime No.143 of 2016, registered under Sections 457 and 392 of Indian Penal Code;
3. Vellakovil Police Station, Crime No.159 of 2016, registered under Section 379 of Indian Penal Code; and
4. Vellakovil Police Station, Crime No.251 of 2016, registered under Section 380 of Indian Penal Code.
3. Further, it is averred in the affidavit that on 27.05.2016, one Senthilkumar, S/o.Eswaramurthy, Kottakattai, Pottikampalayam, Dharampuram Taluk, Tirupur District, as defacto complainant, has given a complaint, wherein it is alleged that the detenu and another has intercepted him and snatched from his pocket a sum of Rs.270/- and also a wrist watch and consequently, a case has been registered in Crime No.438 of 2016 under Section 392 of Indian Penal Code and ultimately, requested the Detaining Authority to invoke Act 14 of 1982 against the detenu.
4. The Detaining Authority, after considering the averments made in the affidavit and other connected materials, has derived a subjective satisfaction to the effect that the detenu is a habitual offender and ultimately, branded him as "Goonda" by way of passing the impugned Detention Order and in order to quash the same, the present petition has been filed by the detenu himself, as petitioner.
5. On the side of the respondents, a counter has been filed, wherein, it is contended to the effect that most of the averments made in the petition are false. The Sponsoring Authority has submitted all the relevant materials to the Detaining Authority. The Detaining Authority, after considering all the relevant materials and other connected papers, has derived a subjective satisfaction to the effect that the detenu is a habitual offender and rightly passed the impugned Detention Order and the same does not require any interference and altogether the present petition deserves to be dismissed.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended to the effect that on the side of the detenu, two representations have been submitted to the concerned authorities, but the same have not been disposed of without
delay and therefore, the Detention Order in question is liable to be quashed.
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has contended that the representations submitted on the side of the detenu have been duly disposed of without delay and therefore, the contention urged on the side of the petitioner is liable to be rejected.
8. On the side of the respondents, a proforma has been submitted, wherein, it has been clearly stated that in respect of first representation, in between column Nos.7 and 9, 5 clear working days and in between Column Nos.12 and 13, 15 clear working days are available and likewise, in respect of second respondent, in between column numbers 7 and 9, 5 clear working days are available and no explanation has been given on the side of the respondents with regard to such delay and that the same would affect the rights of the detenu guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and therefore, the Detention Order in question is liable to be quashed.
9. In fine, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the Detention Order dated 05.10.2016 passed in C.M.P.No.27/Goonda/2016 by the second respondent against the detenu by name, Karuppusamy, aged 24 years, son of Arumugam, Door No.2/16, Moonu Cent, Kuthirambam, Erumadu Post, Pandhalur Taluk, Nilgiris District is quashed and directed to set him at liberty forthwith unless he is required to be incarcerated in any other case.
Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS V ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar gpa To
1. The Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St. George Chennai - 600 009
2. The District Magistrate and District Collector Tiruppur District
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.
4. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law & Order) Fort St.George, Chennai-9
5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.B.Chandran, Advocate in sr.no.51763 H.C.P.No.2654 of 2016 SSI(CO) NR 25/07/2017