Punitha v. The State Rep By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.02.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Punitha W/o.Manikandan ..
Petitioner Vs.
1.
The State Rep. by the Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St.George Chennai-600 009.
2.
The Commissioner of Police Salem City Linemedu Salem - 636 006.
3.
The Superintendent Central Prison, Salem 4.
The Inspector of Police Kannankurichi Police Station Salem City.
.. Respondents Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Page Nos.1/7
India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call for the records in connection with the detention order passed by the second respondent dated 29.06.2022 in C.M.P.No.65/Goonda/Salem City/2022 against the petitioner's son Pradap @ Sukesh, Male, aged 21 years, S/o.Manikandan who is detained in Central Prison, Salem and set aside the detention order and direct the respondents to produce him before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner :
Mr.F.Wellington For Respondents :
Mr.R.Muniyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John Advocate
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,] Captioned 'Habeas Corpus Petition' [hereinafter 'HCP' for the sake of convenience and clarity] has been filed by mother of detenu assailing a 'detention order dated 29.06.2022 bearing reference No.C.M.P.No.65/Goonda/Salem City/2022' [hereinafter 'impugned detention order' for the sake of convenience and clarity] made by the 'second respondent' [hereinafter 'Detaining Authority' for the sake of Page Nos.2/7
convenience and clarity].
2. Mr.F.Wellington, learned counsel on record for petitioner who is before us, notwithstanding very many averments in the support affidavit makes one pointed submission and that one pointed submission is, in the arrest intimation form at Page No.178 of the booklet (to be noted, grounds of preventive detention have been supplied to the detenu in the form of booklet) shows that the information about the arrest has been given to mother of the detenu (petitioner before us) but there is no signature in the arrest intimation form.
3. To be noted, a scanned reproduction of this arrest intimation memo at Page No.178 of the booklet is as follows:
Page Nos.3/7
Page Nos.4/7
4. Learned Prosecutor submits that the mother has in fact been informed and aforementioned lapse is an inadvertent omission.
5. As it is a preventive detention case, we remind ourselves that preventive detention is not punishment and HCP is a high prerogative writ. In this view of the matter, we are unable to accept the explanation of learned Prosecutor. The legal reason is, this has hampered the rights of the detenu to make an effective representation against the impugned detention order which is a constitutional safeguard ingrained in Article 22(5) of Constitution of India. Therefore, we find it appropriate to interfere with the impugned detention order.
6. Apropos, the sequitur is, captioned HCP is allowed. Impugned detention order dated 29.06.2022 bearing reference C.M.P.No.65/Goonda/Salem City/2022 made by the second respondent is set aside and the detenu Mr.Pradap @ Sukesh, son of Mr.Manikandan is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in connection with any Page Nos.5/7
other case / cases. There shall be no order as to costs. (M.S.,J.) (M.N.K.,J.) 24.02.2023 Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking mk P.S: Registry to forthwith communicate this order to Jail authorities in Central Prison, Salem.
To 1.
The State Rep. by the Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St.George Chennai-600 009.
2.
The Commissioner of Police Salem City, Linemedu Salem - 636 006.
3.
The Superintendent Central Prison, Salem 4.
The Inspector of Police Kannankurichi Police Station Salem City.
5.
The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.
Page Nos.6/7
M.SUNDAR, J., and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J., mk 24.02.2023 Page Nos.7/7