Ammu, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.10.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.BASKARAN H.C.P.No.998 of 2016 Ammu .. Petitioner Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep by its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George,Chennai-600 009.

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

.. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent in his proceedings No.364/BCDFGISSSV/2016, dated 29.3.2016, against the detenu Vinoth @ Vinoth Kumar, son of Ramakrishnan, aged about 28 years, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and set aside the same and to direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.Ilayaraja Kandasamy For Respondents : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, APP

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by S.BASKARAN, J.] This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the mother of the detenu, namely, Vinoth @ Vinoth Kumar, son of Ramakrishnan, aged about 28 years, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records, in No.364/BCDFGISSSV/2016,

dated 29.3.2016, 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 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, represents that there is non application of mind by the detaining authority. The learned counsel points out that in the grounds of detention, it had been stated that bail applications are pending in respect of Crime Nos.1111 of 2015, 407 of 2016 and 410 of 2016, on the file of K6 T.P.Chatram Police Station, whereas from the Special Report found in page No.288 of the booklet furnished to the detenu, it had been stated that the relatives of the detenu are taking steps to furnish sureties to release the detenu on bail. Therefore, there is non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in passing the impugned detention order.

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 in the impugned detention order, it had been mentioned that bail applications are pending in respect of K6 T.P.Chatram Police Station Crime Nos.1111/2015, 407 of 2016 and 410 of 2016. But, in the Special Report found in page No.288 of the booklet furnished to the detenu, it had been stated that the relatives of the detenu are taking steps to furnish sureties to release the detenu on bail in respect of the above crime numbers. Thus, it is apparent that there is non application of mind on the part of the authorities concerned, in passing the impugned 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 29.3.2016, 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.

-s/dAssistant 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 City Police, Commissioner Office, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.

3.The Superintendent Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai 4.The Joint Secretary to Government to Government, Public Law and Order Fort St.George Chennai-9 5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

H.C.P.No.998 of 2016 vd(co) aa23/11/2016