Saravanan@Saravanakumar v. The Principal Secreatary To
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 26.06.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI H.C.P(MD)No.1760 of 2018 Saravanan @ Saravanakumar ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, 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 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records, connected with the detention order of the Respondent No.2 in No.58/BCDFGISSSV/2018 dated 07.12.2018 and quash the same and direct the Respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu by name Saravanan @ Saravanakumar, son of Kasipandi, aged about 22 years, now detained at Madurai Central Prison, before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.K.Dinesh Babu Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.) The detenu himself is the petitioner and challenging the legality of the impugned order of detention dated 07.12.2018 passed by the 2nd respondent, in and by which, the detenu has been branded as a 'Goonda' under the provisions of section 3[1] of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot leggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Goondas, Slum Grabbers and Video
Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982), came forward to file the present Habeas Corpus Petition.
2. A perusal of the Grounds of Detention dated 07.12.2018, passed by the 2nd respondent herein, would disclose among other things that the detenu, viz., Saravanan @ Saravanakumar came to the adverse notice in the following three cases:- Sl.
No.
Name of the Police Station and Crime No.
Section of Law 1.
E2 Mathichiyam Police Station Cr.No.478 of 147, 148, 506(ii) IPC altered into Section 147, 148, 302 and 506(ii) IPC r/w 3(2)(v) SC/ST New Amendment Act, 2.
D2 Sellur Police Station Cr.No.650 of 147, 148, 341, 302 and 506(ii) IPC altered into Section 147, 148, 341, 120B, 449, 302 and 506(ii) IPC 3.
E2 Mathichiyam Police Station Cr.No.500 of 341, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) IPC It is further stated in the grounds of detention that the defacto complainant viz., Sathyaraj, S/o. Packiyam, a resident of Aalwarpuram, Madurai has lodged a complaint on 06.11.2018, on the file of E2 Mathichiyam Police Station, alleging among other things that the detenu is a notorious rowdy and when the defacto complainant and his elder brother went to buy flower at Anna Bus Stand, Madurai, the detenu waylaid him and demanded money and when it was refused he took a knife and put it on his chest and robbed Rs.1,200/- from his shirt pocket and when he raised alarm, his brother and the general public came there to secure him and they were threatened with dire consequences by brandishing the knife and taking advantage of the situation, he fled away from the scene.
Based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, E2 Mathichiyam Police, Madurai registered a case in Crime No.634 of 2018 for the commission of the offences under Sections 392 r/w 397 and 506(ii) I.P.C. (ground case) and the case is under investigation. Pursuant to the registration of the F.I.R., the detenu was arrested on 06.11.2018 and was produced before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai on the same day and was ordered to be remanded till 20.11.2018 and it was extended till 18.12.2018.
The Detaining Authority on being satisfied that the activities of the detenu were prejudicial to the maintenance of the public peace and order, branded him as a 'Goonda' and detained him under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, by clamping the impugned order of detention and challenging the legality of the same, the present Habeas Corpus Petition is filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the detenu is in custody in connection with the ground case and in order to derive subjective satisfaction as to the real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail and will indulge in further activities, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of
public order placed reliance upon the order granting bail in Crl.M.P.No.1732 of 2016 dated 30.03.2016 by the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it cannot be termed as a similar case for the reason that though the accused therein had previous cases, all had ended in acquittal and the learned Judge has taken into account the period of incarceration also and in the light of the above, the subjective satisfaction derived by the detaining authority is vitiated and therefore, he prays for quashment of the impugned order of detention.
4.Per contra, Mr.K.Dinesh Babu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, by drawing the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit, would submit that taking into account the gravity of the offence, which would have an effect on the society, the Detaining Authority, after due and proper application of mind has rightly clamped the order of detention and prays for dismissal of this petition.
5. This Court has considered the rival submissions and also perused the materials placed before it.
6.As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the order granting bail with regard to the similar case dated 30.03.2016, in Crl.M.P.No.1732 of 2016, on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai, relied on by the Detaining Authority, cannot be considered as a similar case for the reason that the concerned accused in the said bail application though had previous cases, all the cases had ended in acquittal and the period of incarceration was also taken into consideration while enlarging the concerned accused on bail and in the light of the above, the subjective satisfaction derived by the Detaining Authority in that regard is vitiated. Hence, on the sole ground, the impugned order of detention warrants interference. 7.
In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed by setting aside the Order of Detention passed by the second respondent herein, namely, The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City in No.58/BCDFGISSSV/2018 dated 07.12.2018. Consequently, the detenu, namely, Saravanan @ Saravanakumar, son of Kasipandi, aged about 22 years, who is now detained at Central Prison, Madurai is directed to be released forthwith unless his presence [or] custody [or] detention is required in connection with any other case/proceedings.
To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, 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.
4.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law & Order), Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
H.C.P(MD)No.1760 of 2018 26.06.2019 CS: 15/07/2019 4P 6C