IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 03/07/2006
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.DHANAPALAN
Habeas Corpus Petition No.373 of 2006
Shanthi Petitioner
-Vs-
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu
rep. by the
Secretary to Government,
Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai 9.
2. The District Collector,
Coimbatore District,
Coimbatore.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Prohibition Enforcement
Department(Unit-I),
Avinashi, Coimbatore District,
Coimbatore. Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records of the detention
order made in Cr.M.P.10/BL/2006/E4 dated 27.3.2006, District Collector,
Coimbatore District, the second respondent herein, set aside the same and to
direct the respondents to produce the detenu Murugan @ Manusan S/o Palani now
confined in Central Prison at Coimbatore before this Court and set the detenu
at liberty.
!For Petitioner : Mr.G.K.R.Pandian
^For Respondents: Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran
Addl. Public Prosecutor
:ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by V.DHANAPALAN,J.)
The petitioner, who is the wife of the detenu by name Murugan @
Manusan, who is detained as a ”Bootlegger” as contemplated under V the Tamil
Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest
Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates
Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), by the impugned detention order dated
27.03.2006, challenges the same in this Petition.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
3. At the foremost, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
there is enormous delay in disposal of the representation of the detenu, which
vitiates the ultimate order of detention. With reference to the above claim,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor has placed the details, which show that
the representation of the detenu dated 0 5.03.2006 was received by the
Government on 06.04.2006 and remarks were called for on 07.04.2006 and
reminder was sent on 18.04.2006 and the remarks were received by the
Government on the same day i.e. on 1 8.04.2006 and the File was also
submitted on the same day i.e. on 18.04.2006 and the same was dealt with by
the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary on 19.04.2006 and finally, the
Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed orders on 20.04.2006. The
rejection letter was prepared on 10.05.2006 and the same was sent to the
detenu on 12.05.2006 and served to him on 17.05.2006. As rightly pointed out
by the learned counsel for the petitioner, though the Minister for Prohibition
and Excise passed an order on 20.04.2006, there is no explanation at all for
taking time for preparation of rejection letter till 10.05.200 6. In the
absence of any explanation by the person concerned even after excluding the
intervening holidays, we are of the view that the time taken for preparation
of rejection letter is on the higher side and we hold that the said delay has
prejudiced the detenu in disposal of his representation. On this ground, we
quash the impugned order of detention.
4. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the
impugned order of detention is set aside. The detenu is directed to be set at
liberty forthwith from the custody unless he is required in some other case or
cause.
raa
To
1. The Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The District Collector,
Coimbatore District, Coimbatore.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Prohibition Enforcement Department(Unit-I),
Avinashi, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore.
4. The Superintendent,
Central Prison, Coimbatore.
(In duplicate for communication to detenu)
5. The Joint Secretary to Government,
Public (Law and Order)
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
6. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.