J. Lakshmi v. The Secretary To Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.01.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU H.C.P.(MD)No.963 of 2016 J.Lakshmi : Petitioner Vs.

1. The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

2. The District Magistrate and District Collector, Office of the District Magistrate and District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3. The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, Dindigul District.

4. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai.

: Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records, connected with the detention order in Detention Order No.16/2016, dated 02.07.2016, on the file of the second respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the petitioner's son, namely, Alagupadmanaban, S/o.Jeyaraman, aged about 22 years, now confined at Central Prison, Madurai, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For Respondents : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by R.SUBBIAH, J] The petitioner is the detenu - Alagupadmanaban, S/o.Jeyaraman, aged about 22 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in Detention Order No.16/2016, dated 02.07.2016, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. Though the detention order is sought to be assailed on several grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioner mainly

relies on the contention that the Detaining Authority, while arriving at the subjective satisfaction to detain the detenu as a Goonda, has not mentioned about the bail order granted in similar case and he has also not dealt with the likelihood of the detenu coming out on bail in the groiund case, which shows that the Detention Order was passed with total non-application of mind.

3. We find some force in the above said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, because, non-mentioning of the relevant details to detain the detenu as Goonda under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, would vitiate the order of detention. Therefore, on that ground, we are inclined to set aside the order of detention.

4. In the result, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned Detention Order, passed by the second respondent, in his proceedings in Detention Order No.16/2016, dated 02.07.2016, is quashed. The detenu, namely Alagupadmanaban, S/o.Jeyaraman, aged about 22 years, is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required for detention in connection with any other case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

2. The District Magistrate and District Collector, Office of the District Magistrate and District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law & Order) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

4. The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, Dindigul District.

5. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai.

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

NB TE/CM-MSA : 09/02/2017 : 2P/7C Order made in H.C.P.(MD)No.963 of 2016 Dated: 18.01.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/