Poomail v. The Secretary To Government
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31.03.2015
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN HABEAS CORPUS PETITION(MD)No.1549 of 2014 Poomail .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, 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.94/BCDFGISSSV/2014, dated 23.12.2014 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu namely Pandi @ Karuva Pandi, Son of Muthu Selvam, aged about 29 years 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.94/BCDFGISSSV/2014, dated 23.12.2014 by the detaining authority, who has been arrayed as
second respondent herein against the detenu by name Pandi @ Karuva Pandi, Son of Muthu Selvam and quash the same and thereby set him at liberty forthwith.
2. The Inspector of Police, D1 Tallakulam 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.938 of 2014 D1 Tallakulam Police Station registered under Sections 147, 148, 294(b) and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Further it is stated in the affidavit that one Chandran, Son of Govindu as complainant has given a complaint to the Inspector of Police, D1 Tallakulam Police Station against the detenu and the same has been registered in Crime No.943 of 2014 under Sections 147, 148, 307 and 302 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 mother of the detenu as petitioner.
5. On the side of the respondents a detailed counter has been filed, wherein it has been contended inter alia 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 four 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 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, four clear working days are available and in between Column Nos.12 and 13, eleven clear working days are available. With regard to second
representation in between Column Nos.7 to 9, four clear working days are available and in between Column Nos.12 and 13, nine clear working days are available. 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, nine clear working days are available and with regard to fourth representation in between Column Nos.7 to 9, four clear working days are available and in between Column Nos.12 and 13, nine 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 No.94/BCDFGISSSV/2014, dated 23.12.2014 by the second respondent/detaining authority is quashed and consequently the respondents are directed to set the detenu viz., Pandi @ Karuva Pandi, Son of Muthu Selvam 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 Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, 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.
[in duplicate to communicate the detenu] 4.The Joint Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu, Public (Law & order) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 5.The Inspector of Police, D1 Tallakulam Police Station, Madurai. 6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1cc to Mr.R.Alagumani, Advocate, in SR. No.16071. ORDER MADE IN ps H.C.P(MD)No.1549 of 2014 msm 01.04.2015 p3/9c 31.03.2015