Alamelu 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.2644 of 2019 Alamelu ... Petitioner/wife of the Detenue -vs1.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Dept., Secretariat, Fort.St.George, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

... 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 BCDFGISSSV No.81/2019 dated 15.11.2019 passed against the petitioner's husband the detenu namely Venkatesan, son of Pandiyan, aged about 39 years, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai - 66 and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the body and person of the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.

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 wife of Venkatesan, son of Pandiyan, aged about 39 years, who is the detenu. The detenu has been

detained by the second respondent by his order in BCDFGISSSV No.81/2019 dated 15.11.2019, holding him to be a "Bootlegger", as contemplated under Section 2(b) 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 surrendered on 19.09.2019, the detention order was passed only on 15.11.2019 i.e., after a considerable delay of more than 1 1/2 months. Therefore, the detention order has to be set aside. 4.As seen from the grounds of detention, it is clear that though the detenu surrendered on 19.09.2019, the order of detention came to be passed only on 15.11.2019 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 BCDFGISSSV No.81/2019 dated 15.11.2019, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Venkatesan, son of Pandiyan, aged about 39 years is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi/ms

To 1.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Dept., Secretariat, Fort.St.George, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

3.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public Law & Order,Fort St.George, Chennai-9 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

H.C.P.No.2644 of 2019 VGII(CO) GS(01/07/2020)