Raman v. The Secretary To The Government,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.05.2020 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and The Hon'ble Ms. Justice P.T.ASHA H.C.P. No.2435 of 2019 Raman .. Petitioner/ Father of Detenue -vs1.The Secretary to the Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, (Home) Prohibition and Excise Dept., Secretariat, Fort.St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Chennai.
... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records connected with the order of the second respondent herein in Memo No.688/BCDFGISSSV/2019 dated 17.10.2019 passed against the petitioner's son the detenu namely Rajesh son of Raman, aged about 35 years, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 66 and set aside the same, consequently, direct the respondents herein to produce the body and person of the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith. For Petitioner .. Mr.A.Murugavel For Respondents .. Mr.R.Prathap Kumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] The petitioner is the father of Rajesh, aged about 35 years, who is the detenu. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Memo No.688/BCDFGISSSV/2019 dated 17.10.2019, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.
3.Among other grounds, the detention order is mainly attacked on the ground that there is a delay in passing the order of detention. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strongly contended that though the detenu was arrested on 14.09.2019, the detention order was passed only on 17.10.2019 i.e., after a considerable delay of more than one month. Therefore, the detention order has to be set aside. 4.As seen from the grounds of detention, it is clear that though the detenu was arrested on 14.09.2019, the order of detention came to be passed only on 17.10.2019 and hence, there is an abnormal delay in passing the order of Detention, which caused prejudice to the interest of the detenu. 5.We have gone through the entire materials placed on record. There is no satisfactory explanation offered by the Detaining Authority for the delay in passing the order of detention. Hence the impugned order of detention is liable to be set aside.
6. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in Memo No.688/BCDFGISSSV/2019 dated 17.10.2019, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Rajesh son of Raman, aged about 35 years is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar mmi/ms To 1.The Secretary to the Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, (Home) Prohibition and Excise Dept., Secretariat, Fort.St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
4.The Joint Secretary to Government Public (Law & Order) Fort.st.George, Chennai.
5.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
H.C.P.No.2435 of 2019