Prisila v. The Secretary To Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 21.07.2015 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.S.RAVI H.C.P.(MD)No.254 of 2015 Prisila .. Petitioner Vs.

1.State of Tamilnadu, rep.by the Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department, Fort.St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector & District Magistrate, O/o District Collector & District Magistrate, Thoothukudi District.

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 H.S.(M) Confdl.No.11/2015 dated 14.02.2015 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu by name Santhanaraj @ Sandal S/o Rajadurai @ Regadurai aged about 34 years now detained in Palayamkottai Central Prison before this 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 H.S.(M) Confdl.No.11/2015 dated 14.02.2015 by the detaining authority who has been arrayed as second respondent herein against the detenu by name Santhanaraj @ Sandal S/o Rajadurai @ Regadurai and quash the same and thereby set him at liberty forthwith.

2. The Inspector of Police, Thoothukudi South 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.211 of 2014, Thoothukudi North Police Station, registered under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.

(ii)Crime No.151 of 2014, Thoothukudi Central Police Station, registered under Sections 341, 294(b), 387 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii)Crime No.547 of 2014, Thoothukudi South Police Station, registered under Sections 406, 420, 294(b) and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv)Crime No.659 of 2014, Thoothukudi South Police Station, registered under Section 399 of the Indian Penal Code.

(v)Crime No.18 of 2015, Muthiahpuram Police Station, registered under Sections 341, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Further it is stated in the affidavit that on 22.01.2015, one Saravanan as defacto complainant has given a complaint against the detenu in Thoothukudi South Police Station and the same has been registered in Crime No.54 of 2015 under Sections 341, 294(b), 387 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 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-in-law 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 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 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, 23 clear working

days are available and in between column Nos.12 and 13, 7 clear working days are available and with regard to second representation in between column Nos.7 to 9, 52 clear working days are available and in between column Nos.12 and 13, 5 clear working days are available and no explanation has been given on the side of the respondents with regard to such huge delay in disposing of the representations 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 14.02.2015 passed in H.S.(M) Confdl.No.11/2015 by the detaining authority/second respondent herein is quashed and the detenu by name Santhanaraj @ Sandal is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, unless he is required to be incarcerated in any other case.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(R ) \\True copy\\ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department, Fort.St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector & District Magistrate, O/o District Collector & District Magistrate, Thoothukudi District.

3. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order), Fort St.George, Chennai -9. 4.The Superintendent of Prison, Palayamkottai Central Prison, Tirunelveli District.

5.The Addl.Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1cc to Mr.R.Alagumani, Advocate Sr.No.40170 akm/22.07.15 /3p-7c/ H.C.P.(MD)No.254 of 2015 21.07.2015