Pounraj v. The Principal Secretary To

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29.06.2015 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.S.RAVI H.C.P.(MD)No.184 of 2015 Pounraj .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamilnadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise(IX) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City, Tirunelveli.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Palayamkottai Central Prison, Tirunelveli District.

.. Respondents Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records connected with the detention order of the respondent No.2 in No.5/BCDFGISSSV/2015 dated 19.01.2015 and quash the same and direct the Respondents to produce the detenu namely Pounraj S/o.Sundarrajan, aged about 25 years detained in Palayamkottai Central Prison before this Honourable Court and set him at liberty.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.C.Ramesh Addl.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 the detention order passed in No.5/BCDFGISSSV/2015 dated 19.01.2015 by the detaining authority who has been arrayed as second respondent herein against the detenu by name Pounraj S/o.Sundarrajan and quash the same and thereby set him at liberty forthwith.

2. The Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai 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.4 of 2014, Perumalpuram Crime Police Station, registered under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

(ii)Crime No.88 of 2014, Perumalpuram Crime Police Station, registered under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii)Crime No.280 of 2014, Palayamkottai Crime Police Station, registered under Sections 457, 380 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv)Crime No.519 of 2014, Palayamkottai Crime Police Station, registered under Sections 454/457, 380 of the Indian Penal Code altered into Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.

(v)Crime No.345 of 2014, Perumalpuram Crime Police Station, registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

(vi)Crime No.407 of 2014, Perumalpuram Crime Police Station, registered under Sections 454/457, 380 of the Indian Penal Code altered into Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Further it is stated in the affidavit that on 17.10.2014 one Shalisha as defacto complainant has given a complaint to the Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai police station against the detenu and the same has been registered in Crime No.741 of 2014 under Sections 341, 392 r/w 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 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 counter has been filed, wherein it has been inter alia 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 are 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 on the side of the detenu are duly 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, 5 clear working days are available and in between column Nos.12 and 13, 6 clear working days are available and with regard to second representation in between column Nos.7 to 9, 7 clear working days are available and in between column Nos.12 and 13, 9 clear working days are available and no explanation has

been given on the side of the respondents with regard to such delay in disposing of the representations submitted on the side of the detenu and that itself would affect his rights 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 19.01.2015 passed in No.5/BCDFGISSSV/2015 by the detaining authority/second respondent herein is quashed and the petitioner/detenu is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, unless he is required to be incarcerated in any other case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamilnadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise(IX) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2 The Joint Secretary to Govt.of Tamilnadu, Public (Law & Order)Dept., Fort.St.George,Chennai - 9.

3.The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City, Tirunelveli.

4 The Additional Director General of Police(L&O), Chennai.

5.The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.

6.The Superintendent of Prison, Palayamkottai Central Prison, Tirunelveli District.(induplicate to communicate the detenu) 7.The Addl.Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1cc to Mr.R.Alagumani,Advocate SR.No.34902 H.C.P.(MD)No.184 of 2015 29.06.2015 mj PA/SJW/01.07.2015/3P/10C