High Court Madras High Court

Gundumani @ Vedagiri vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 19 June, 2006

Madras High Court
Gundumani @ Vedagiri vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 19 June, 2006
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           

Dated: 19/06/2006 

Coram 

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM   
and 
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.DHANAPALAN    

Habeas Corpus Petition No.239 of 2006 

Gundumani @ Vedagiri                      ... Petitioner

-Vs-

1. The State of Tamilnadu
 represented by the
 Secretary to the Government,
 Prohibition and Excise Department,
 Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

 2. The District Collector and
 District Magistrate,
 Kancheepuram District,
 Kancheepuram.  

 3. The Superintendent of Central Prison,
 Central Prison, Chennai-600 003.          ...  Respondents

        Petition under Article 226  of  the  Constitution  of  India  for  the
issuance  of  Writ  of Habeas Corpus to call for the records pertaining to the
detention order in B.D.F.G.I.S.V.No.06/2006, dated 18.02.2006, passed  by  the
second respondent herein, quash the same, direct the respondent to produce the
body  of the person of the detenu namely Gundumani @ Vedagiri, son of Chellan,
before Court and set him at liberty.

!For Petitioner         :  Mr.S.Palanikumar

^For Respondents        :  Mr.  M.Babu Muthu Meeran,
                           Addl.  Public Prosecutor.
:ORDER  

(Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM, J.)

The petitioner challenges the detention order, dated 18.02.2006,
detaining him as Bootlegger as contemplated under 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).

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

2. At the foremost, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
pursuant to the representation dated 23.03.2006, the Government, in their
Reply dated 05.05.2006, though assured to supply certain documents, the same
have not been supplied. According to the counsel, due to non-supply of those
documents, the detenu was prevented from making effective representation,
hence, the impugned order of detention is liable to be quashed.

4. We verified the records. In the reply dated 05.05.2006, the
Government, while considering the representation of the detenu dated 23.0
3.2006, informed that a copy of the bail application is to be served; and also
communicated the letter dated 5.5.2006 to all the authorities including the
Detaining Authority at Kancheepuram. In the absence of any proof that copy
was supplied to the detenu as assured in the letter dated 05.05.2006, we are
of the view that the detenu was handicapped in making effective
representation. On this ground, the detention order is liable to be quashed.

5. 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.

JI

To

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

2. District Collector &
District Magistrate, Kancheepuram Dt.

3. The Superintendent,
Central Prison, Chennai.

(In duplicate for communication to detenu)

4. The Joint Secretary to Government,
Public (Law and Order)
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.

5. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.