← Library
Madras High CourtHCP(MD)/517/2023allowed

Ramalakshmi v. The Additional Chief Secretary To Government

2023-08-14Honourable Mr Justice M.S. Ramesh,Honourable Mr Justice M. Nirmal Kumar6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.08.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR H.C.P.(MD)No.517 of 2023 Ramalakshmi .. Petitioner / wife of the detenu Vs.

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, State of Tamil Nadu Fort St. George Chennai-600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate Tirunelveli District Tirunelveli 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Palayamkottai Central Prison Tirunelveli District.

.. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records connected with the detention order of the respondent No.2 in MHS Confdl. No.22/2023 dated 21.02.2023 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu by name Esakkimuthu alias Kattai, son of Murugan aged about 38

years, now detained in Palayamkottai Central Prison before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vinoth Bharathi For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.) The petitioner is the wife of the detenu viz., Esakkimuthu @ Kattai aged about 38 years, S/o.Murugan. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in MHS Confdl. No.22/2023 dated 21.02.2023 holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

3. Though several grounds have been raised in the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would mainly focus his argument on the ground that the detaining authority, after being aware of the fact that detenu has not filed any bail application, came to the conclusion that there is a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail by relying upon the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.2907/2022 dated 30.09.2020. The learned counsel therefore submitted that the order that was relied upon by the detaining authority was not similar and the accused therein was granted bail during COVID-19 pandemic and on that score, the detention order is liable to be interfered with.

4. Though counter has not been filed by the respondents, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the Habeas Corpus Petition. He would further submit that on completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed and the same is yet to be taken on file.

5. On carefully going through the detention order, the detaining authority was aware of the fact that the detenu has not filed any bail application. However, the detaining authority took into consideration the

order passed in Crl.M.P.No.2907/2020 dated 30.09.2020 and came to the conclusion that there is a likelihood of the detenu coming out on bail. Perusal of the order shows that the accused therein had been granted bail during the COVID-19 pandemic and therefore, the bail order that was relied upon by the detaining authority cannot be considered to be a similar one.

6. In view of the above, the detention order suffers from non application of mind and the same is liable to be interfered with by this Court. The impugned detention order is, therefore, liable to be quashed.

7. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in MHS Confdl. No.22/2023 dated 21.02.2023 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Esakkimuthu @ Kattai, S/o.Murugan, aged about 38 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. (M.S.R.,J.) (M.N.K.,J.) 14.08.2023 Internet : Yes RR

To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, State of Tamil Nadu Fort St. George Chennai-600 009.

2.The Joint Secretary Public (Law and order) Secretariat, Chennai.

3.The District Collector and District Magistrate Tirunelveli District Tirunelveli 4.The Superintendent of Prison, Palayamkottai Central Prison Tirunelveli District.

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

M.S.RAMESH, J.

and M.NIRMAL KUMAR,J.

RR H.C.P.(MD)No.517 of 2023 14.08.2023