Sugadevi v. The Additional Chief Secretary To Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.07.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR H.C.P.(MD)No.67 of 2023 Sugadevi

...Petitioner / Wife of the Detenu

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Inspector of Police Krishnankovil Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Maudrai.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records relating to the

detention order passed by the second respondent in detention Order Cr.M.P.No.48/2022 (Drug Offender) dated 06.12.2022 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenue Gunasekaran, son of Mayee, Male, aged 31 years who is detained at Central Prison, Madurai before this Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muniyandi For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH,J.) The petitioner is the wife of the detenu viz., Gunasekaran, S/o.Mayee, Male, aged about 31 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Cr.M.P.No.48/2022 dated 06.12.2022, holding him to be a "Drug Offender", as contemplated under Section 2(e) 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 21.10.2022, the detention order was passed only on 06.12.2022 i.e., after a considerable delay of more than 35 days. 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 21.10.2022, the order of detention came to be passed only on 06.12.2022 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 Cr.M.P.No.48/2022 dated 06.12.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, Gunasekaran, S/o.Mayee, Male, aged about 31 years is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. (M.S.R.,J.) & (M.N.K.,J.) 24.07.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Yuva

To 1.The Principal Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public Law and Order Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

3.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

4.The Inspector of Police Krishnankovil Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

5.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Maudrai.

6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

M.S.RAMESH, J.

AND M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

Yuva H.C.P.(MD)No.67 of 2023 24.07.2023