Chithupandi v. The Additional Chief Secretary To The Government
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.07.2023 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Chithupandi .. Petitioner vs.
1.The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai.
... Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned detention order passed by the second respondent in proceedings in Detention Order in Cr.M.P.No.40/D.O/2022 dated 06.09.2022 in detaining the detenu under Section 2 (e) of he Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as a 'Drug Offender' and quash the same and direct the respondents to
produce the detenu namely Velmurugan, S/o.Muniyandi, male, aged about 39 years, who is detained in Central Prison, Madurai before this Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Balasubramanian For respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.] The petitioner is the wife of the detenu viz., Velmurugan, S/o.Muniyandi, aged about 39 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by order in Cr.M.P.No.40/D.O/2022 dated 06.09.2022, holding him to be a 'Drug Offender', as contemplated under Section 2(e) 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. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strongly contended that though the detenu was arrested on 08.07.2022, the detention order was passed only on 06.09.2022 i.e., after a considerable delay of nearly 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 08.07.2022, the order of detention came to be passed only on 06.09.2022 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 Cr.M.P.No.40/D.O/2022 dated 06.09.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Velmurugan, S/o.Muniyandi, aged about 39 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.) 11.07.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order mbi
To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
mbi 11.07.2023