IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 04/04/2006
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.A.K.SAMPATHKUMAR
Habeas Corpus Petition No.60 of 2006
Jagadeesh ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1. The State of
Tamil Nadu,
rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The District Collector
and District
Magistrate,Tiruvallur District,
Tiruvallur
... Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records leading to
the detention of petitioner by name Jagadeesh, son of Ranjit Singh under Act
14/82 vide detention order dated 26.09.2005 on the file of the 2nd respondent
herein, made in proceedings BDFGISV No.23/2005 and set aside the same and
direct the second respondent herein to produce the body now confined in
Central Prison, Chennai, before this Court and thereafter set him at liberty.
!For Petitioner : Mr.M.N.Balakrishnan
^For Respondents : Mr.Abudhukumar Rajarathinam
Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)
:O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM, J.)
The petitioner by name Jagadeesh, who was detained as a ”Goonda” 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 26.09.2 005, challenges the same
in this Petition.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Government Advocate 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 Government Advocate has placed the details, which show that the
representation of the detenu dated 31.12.2005 was received by the Government
on 02.01.2006 and remarks were called for on 03.01.2006. Thereafter, the
remarks were received by the Government on 10.01.2006 and the File was
submitted on 12.01.2006 and the same was dealt with by the Under Secretary and
the Deputy Secretary on the same date i.e. on 12.01.2006 and finally, the
Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed orders on 13.01.2006. The
rejection letter was prepared on 30.01.2006 and the same was sent to the
detenu on the same date i.e., on 30.01.2006 and served to him on 04.02.2006 .
As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, though the
Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed an order on 1 3.01.2006, there is
no explanation at all for taking time for preparation of rejection letter till
30.01.2006. 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 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, State of Tamil Nadu,Prohibition and ExciseDepartment,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Tiruvallur District,
Tiruvallur.
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.