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.392 of 2006
Ilayaraja ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1.The State rep.by its
Secretary to Government
Prohibition and Excise Department
Fort St. George, Chennai 9.
2.The District Magistrate and
District Collector,
Kancheepuram District at
Kancheepuram. .. Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records relating to the
detention order passed by the second respondent pertaining to the order made
in B.D.F.G.I.S.V.No.8/2006 dated 27.02.2006 in detaining the detenue under 2-b
of Tamil Nadu Act, 14 of 1982, as a Bootlegger, quash the same and direct the
respondents to produce the detenue Saratha, wife of Mohan, aged about 35
years, who is detained at Special Prison for Women, Vellore, before this Court
and set her at liberty.
!For Petitioner : Mr.O.S.Thilak Pasumbadiyar
^For Respondents : Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran
Addl. Public Prosecutor
:ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM,J.)
The petitioner, who is the brother of the detenue by name Saratha, who
is detained as a ”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), by the impugned detention order dated 27.02.2006,
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 detenue,
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 detenue dated 04.04.2006 was received by the
Government on 06.04.2006 and remarks were called for on 07.04.2006 and the
remarks were received by the Government on 17.04.2006 and the File was
submitted on 20.04.2006 and the same was dealt with by the Under Secretary on
the same day i.e. on 20.04.2006 and by the Deputy Secretary on 21.04.2006 and
finally, the Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed orders on the same day
i.e. on 21.04.2006. The rejection letter was prepared on 10.05.200 6 and the
same was sent to the detenue on 12.05.2006 and served to him on 16.05.2006.
As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, though the
Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed an order on 21.04.2006, there is no
explanation at all for taking time for preparation of rejection letter till
10.05.2006. 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 detenue in disposal of her
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 detenue is directed to be set
at liberty forthwith from the custody unless she 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 Magistrate and District Collector, Kancheepuram District
Kancheepuram.
3. The Superintendent, Special Prison for Women, Vellore.
(In duplicate for communication to detenue)
4. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order)
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.