D.Santhi v. The Additional Secretary To Government

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.07.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR H.C.P.(MD)No.1742 of 2022 D.Santhi .. Petitioner /mother of the detenu Vs.

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate Thanjavur District. Thanjavur.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Tiruchirappalli Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli District .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records relating to detention order dated 28.08.2022 in P.D.No.113/2022 of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu/petitioner's son by

name D.Vijay aged 30 years, S/o.Durai detained in Trichirappalli Central Prison/3rd respondent before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith. For Petitioner : Ms.J.Priscilla Pandian For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.) The petitioner is mother of the detenu viz., D.Vijay, aged about 30 years, S/o.Durai. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his order in detention order P.D.No.113/2022 dated 28.08.2022 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.Among other grounds, the detention order is mainly attacked on the ground that there is a delay in passing the order of detention. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strongly contended that though the detenu was arrested on 24.06.2022, the detention order was passed only on 28.08.2022 i.e., after a considerable delay of two months. Therefore, the detention order has to be set aside.

4.As seen from the grounds of detention, it is clear that though the detenu was arrested on 24.06.2022, the order of detention came to be passed only on 28.08.2022 and hence, there is an abnormal delay in passing the order of Detention, which caused prejudice to the interest of the detenu. 5.We have gone through the entire materials placed on record. There is no satisfactory explanation offered by the Detaining Authority for the delay in passing the order of detention. Hence the impugned order of detention is liable to be set aside.

6. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in P.D.No.113/2022 dated 28.08.2022 passed by the second

respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., D.Vijay S/o.Durai, aged about 30 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.) 07.07.2023 NCC : Yes/No Internet : Yes RR To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Home Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate Thanjavur District. Thanjavur.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli District 4.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.1742 of 2022 07.07.2023