Krishna Thevar v. The Secretary To Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.03.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD)No.1451 of 2014 Krishna Thevar .. Petitioner Vs.

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

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

3.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Tirunelveli 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 relating to the impugned detention order passed in M.H.S.Confdl.No.74/2014, dated 26.09.2014 on the file of the second respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu namely Murugakutty, aged 32 years, Son of Krishna Thevar, now confined in Central Prison, Palayamkottai before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith and pass such further or other orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sundarapandian 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 M.H.S.Confdl.No.74/2014, dated 26.09.2014 by the detaining authority, who has been arrayed as second respondent herein against the detenu by name Murugakutty, Son of Krishna Thevar and quash the same and thereby set him at liberty forthwith.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi 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 case:

Crime No.23 of 2013 Munneerpallam Police Station registered under Sections 147, 148, 452 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act.

3. Further it is stated in the affidavit that on 02.08.2014 one Sakthivel as complainant has lodged a complaint to the Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station against the detenu and the same has been registered in Crime No.262 of 2014 under Sections 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and also under Section 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code and ultimately requested the detaining authority to invoke Act 14 of 1982 against the detenu.

4. The detaining authority, after considering 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 father of the detenu 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 has contended that on the side of the detenu two 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 the representations submitted on the side of the detenu are duly considered and disposed of without delay and therefore the detention order in question does not call for any interference.

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, fourteen clear working days are available and with regard to second representation in between Column Nos.7 to 9, eight clear working

days are available and in between Column Nos.12 and 13, eight clear working days are available and no explanation has been given on the side of the respondents with regard to huge delay in disposing of the representations submitted on the side of the 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 passed in M.H.S.Confdl.No.74/2014, dated 26.09.2014 by the second respondent/detaining authority is quashed and consequently the respondents are directed to set the detenu viz., Murugakutty, Son of Krishna Thevar at liberty forthwith, unless he is required to be incarcerated in connection with any other case.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(C.O.,) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Tirunelveli District,Tirunelveli.

3.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison, Palayamkottai. [in duplicate to communicate the detenu] 5.The Joint Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu, Public (Law & order) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER MADE IN H.C.P(MD)No.1451 of 2014 25.03.2015 ps msm 26.03.2015 p3/8c