Leema Rose v. The Addl Chief Secretary To The Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.07.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR H.C.P.(MD)No.213 of 2023 Leema Rose ... Petitioner / Wife of the Detenu Vs.

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

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

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli.

.. 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 2nd respondent in Cr.M.P.No.01/2023, dated 24.01.2023 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or detenu, namely, Stephen Arockiyaraj, S/o.Savariraj, aged about 37

years now detained at Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH,J.) The petitioner is the wife of the detenu viz., Stephen Arockiyaraj, S/o.Savariraj, aged about 37 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Cr.M.P.No.01/2023, dated 24.01.2023, 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 08.11.2022, the detention order was passed only on 24.01.2023 i.e., after a considerable delay of more than 70 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 08.11.2022, the order of detention came to be passed only on 24.01.2023 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.01/2023, dated 24.01.2023 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Stephen Arockiyaraj, S/o.Savariraj, aged about 37 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.) 27.07.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Yuva To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

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

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

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

5.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.213 of 2023 27.07.2023