Smt.Lokeshini, F/35 Years v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 28.04.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH H.C.P No.2663 of 2016 Lokeshini

...Petitioner

Vs

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

2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Chennai - 600 007

...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 to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 30.06.2016 in BCDFGISSSV No.622/2016 against the petitioner/detenue Lokeshini, W/o Late.Murugan, female, aged about 35 years, who is confined at Special Prison for Women, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and to set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce the detenue before this Court and set her at liberty.

For Petitioner :

M/s.R.Thanjan For respondents:

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

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S. NAGAMUTHU,J.,) The petitioner/ detenue Lokeshini, has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition, challenging the detention order passed against her by the second respondent, vide proceedings BCDFGISSSV No.622/2016 dated 30.06.2016.

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 there was no bail application pending in Crime No.448/2016, and the detaining authority has stated that the relatives of the detenue were taking steps to file bail application, in which case there was real possibility of the detenue 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 detenue were taking steps to file bail application seeking bail in connection with the case in Crime No.448/2016.

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 detenue seeking bail in Crime No.448/2016 on the file of R-2 Kodambakkam Police Station. Though it is alleged that her 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 30.06.2016, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenue 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 jbm/gsa To

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

2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007

3. The Superintendent, Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, chennai.

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

5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai.

+1cc to Mr.R.Thanjan, Advocate, S.R.No.36627 H.C.P No.2663 of 2016 KJI(CO) RS(11/05/2017)