Palpandi v. The Secretary To Govt
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.03.2015
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD)No.1289 of 2014 Palpandi .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, State of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District.
.. Respondents Prayer:- Habeas Corpus Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus praying to call for entire records connected with the detention order of the respondent No.2 in No.55/BDFGISSV/2014, dated 28.10.2014 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu by name Palpandi, Son of Muthuraman, aged about 35 years, now detained in Madurai Central Prison before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith and pass such further or other orders. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.A.Ramar, Additional Public Prosecutor.
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J) This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to call for records relating to detention order passed in No.55/BDFGISSV/2014, dated 28.10.2014 by the detaining authority, who has been arrayed as second respondent herein against the detenu by name Palpandi, Son of Muthuraman and quash the same and thereby set him at liberty forthwith.
2. The Inspector of Police, B5 South Gate Police Station as sponsoring authority has submitted an affidavit to the detaining authority, wherein it is stated that the detenu has involved in the
following adverse cases:
(i) Crime No.927 of 2013 B5 South Gate Police Station registered under Sections 147, 148, 294(b) and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
(ii) Crime No.1014 of 2013 B5 South Gate Police Station registered under Sections 392 read with 397 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Further it is stated in the affidavit that on 09.10.2014 one Radhakrishnan of Balarengapuram, Madurai as complainant has given a complaint in B5 South Gate Police Station against the detenu and the same has been registered in Crime No.469 of 2014 under Sections 392 read with 397 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code and ultimately requested the detaining authority to invoke Act 14 of 1982 against the detenu.
4. The detaining authority viz., the second respondent herein, after perusing the averments made in the affidavit and other connected documents, has derived subjective satisfaction to the effect that the detenu is a habitual offender and ultimately branded him as 'Goonda' by way of passing the impugned detention order and in order to quash the same, the present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the detenu himself as petitioner.
5. On the side of the respondents a detailed counter has been filed, wherein it has been contended to the effect that all the averments made in the petition are false and ultimately prayed to dismiss the same.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/detenu has contended that on the side of the petitioner/detenu three representations have been submitted and the same have not been disposed of without delay and therefore the detention order in question is liable to be quashed.
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has contended that all the representations submitted by the petitioner/detenu are duly considered and disposed of without delay and therefore the detention order in question need not be quashed.
8. On the side of the respondents, a proforma has been submitted wherein it has been clearly stated that with regard to first representation in between Column Nos.7 to 9, five clear working days are available and in between Column Nos.12 and 13, three clear working days are available. With regard to second representation in between Column Nos.12 and 13, five clear working days are available and with regard to third representation in between Column Nos.7 to 9, four clear working days are available and in between Column Nos.12 and 13, six clear working days are available and no explanation has been given on the side of the respondents with regard to inordinate delay in disposing of the representations submitted by the petitioner/detenu and that itself would affect the rights of the detenu guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and therefore the detention order in question is liable to be quashed.
9. In fine, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the detention order dated 28.10.2014 passed in No.55/BDFGISSV/2014 by the second respondent/detaining authority is quashed and consequently the respondents are directed to set the detenu viz., Palpandi, Son of Muthuraman at liberty forthwith, unless he is required to be incarcerated in connection with any other case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Writs) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, State of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Joint Secretary to Govt., Public (Law & Order) Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Director General of Police, Chennai.
4.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai.
5.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai District. (In duplicate to communicate to the detenu) 6.The Inspector of Police, B5 South Gate Police Station, Madurai.
7.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1cc to Mr.R.Alagumani,Advocate SR.No.12062 ORDER MADE IN H.C.P(MD)No.1289 of 2014 11.03.2015 ps PA/13.03.2015/3P/10C