R.Mala v. Additional Chief Secretary To Government
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.10.2023 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN R.Mala ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066.
5.The Inspector of Police, Tiruvallur Taluk Police Station, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
... Respondents Prayer : Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in BCDFGISSSV.12/2023 dated 29.05.2023 against my son Akash, aged 21 years, S/o Raja Sekar, and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the detenue who is detained under the Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982 currently confined in the Central Prison, Puzhal, before this Honble court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner :
Mr.P.Arunkumar for M/s.J.Jagath Ratchagan For Respondents :
Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J.) The petitioner, mother of the detenu Akash, aged 21 years, S/o Raja Sekar, has come forward with this petition challenging the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 29.05.2023 slapped on her son, branding
him as "Goonda" under 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].
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 3.Though several grounds have been raised by the petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out there is a delay in passing the order of detention. In the present case, though the detenu was arrested on 08.05.2023, the Detention Order was passed only on 29.05.2023. 4.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushantha Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura and Others reported in AIR 2022 SC 4715, has dealt with similar situation and has held in paragraph No.21 as follows:- "In the present case, the circumstances indicate that the detaining authority after the receipt of the proposal from the sponsoring authority was indifferent in
passing the order of detention with greater promptitude. The "live and proximate link" between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention stood snapped in arresting the detenu. More importantly the delay has not been explained in any manner & though this point of delay was specifically raised & argued before the High Court as evident from Para 14 of the impugned judgment yet the High Court has not recorded any finding on the same."
5.The Hon'ble Supreme Court was persuaded to allow the Appeal filed before it mainly on the ground that delay in passing the Order of Detention from the date of the proposal would snap the ''live and proximate link'' between prejudicial activities and the purpose of detention. Therefore, failure on the part of the Detaining Authority in explaining such delay as in the present case also is a valid ground for quashing the Detention Order. 6.The learned counsel for the petitioner further pointed out that the translated copy of the remand order and the remand extension order have not been furnished. It is in this circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that serious prejudice has been caused to the petitioner for
making effective representation.
7.The above issue is already covered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Powanammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (1999) 2 SCC 413, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that what applies to a document, would equally apply to furnishing translated copy of the document in the language known to and understood by the detenue. In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has further held as follows : ''6.The short question that falls for our consideration is whether failure to supply the Tamil version of the order of remand passed in English, a language not known to the detenue, would vitiate her further detention.
......
16. For the above reasons, in our view, the nonsupply of the Tamil version of the English document, on the facts and in the circumstances, renders her continued detention illegal. We, therefore, direct that the detenue be set free forthwith unless she is required to be detained in any other case. The appeal is accordingly allowed.''
8.It is seen from the Booklet that, at Page Nos.59 and 60, the remand order and the remand extension order dated 08.05.2023 and 22.05.2023 respectively are in English and the translated copy of the said documents have not been furnished. Since a specific stand has been taken that serious prejudice is caused to the petitioner, this Court finds that the failure to furnish translated copy of the remand order and remand extension order also vitiates the Detention Order.
9.In view of the aforesaid reasons, the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent in No.BCDFGISSSV.12/2023 dated 29.05.2023 is hereby set aside and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu viz., Akash, aged 21 years, S/o Raja Sekar, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless he is required in connection with any other case. (S.S.S.R., J.) (S.M., J.) 10.10.2023 mkn
Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066.
5.The Inspector of Police, Tiruvallur Taluk Police Station, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
S.S. SUNDAR , J.
and SUNDER MOHAN, J.
mkn 10.10.2023