High Court Madras High Court

Jayapaul vs The Secretary To The Government on 13 March, 2006

Madras High Court
Jayapaul vs The Secretary To The Government on 13 March, 2006
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           

Dated: 13/03/2006 

Coram 

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM   
and 
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.A.K.SAMPATHKUMAR      

HCP.No.1286 of 2005  

Jayapaul                                       ... Petitioner

-Vs-

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

2.The District Magistrate and
   District Collector,
  O/o the Collectorate,
  Perambalur District,
  Perambalur.                                           ... 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
second respondent pertaining to the detention order made in Crl.M.P.No.53/2005
dated 15.11.2005 in detaining the detenue under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as a
"Bootlegger", quash the same and direct the respondents to  produce  the  said
detenue  namely  Indira,  wife of Jayapaul aged about 35 years now detained at
Special Prison for Women, Tiruchirappalli, before ther Court and  set  her  at
liberty.

!For Petitioner :  Mr.D.Veerasekaran

^For Respondents        :  Mr.M.K.Subramanian
                Govt.  Advocate (Crl.  Side)

:O R D E R 

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

The petitioner, who is the husband of the detenue by name Indira, who
was 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 15.11.2005,
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 detenue,
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 detenue dated 04.12.200 5 was received by the Government
on 07.12.2005 and remarks were called for on 08.12.2005. The particulars of
the Collectorate show that the intimation was was received by the Collectorate
on 13 .12.2005 and the parawar remarks were called for from the Sponsoring
authority on the same date i.e. on 13.12.2005 and the remarks were received
from the sponsoring authority on 15.12.2005 and the report was sent to the
Government on 21.12.2005. The remarks were received by the Government on
23.12.2005. Thereafter, the File was submitted on 26.12.2005 and the same was
dealt with by the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary on 27.12.2005 and
finally, the Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed orders on 28.12.2005.
The rejection letter was prepared on 04.01.2006 and the same was sent to the
detenue on 05.01.2006 and served to him on 07.01.2006. As rightly pointed out
by the learned counsel for the petitioner, though the remarks were received
from the sponsoring authority on 15.12.2005, the report was sent to the
Government only on 21.12.2005 and there is no explanation at all for sending
the report to the Government belatedly. Further it is also pointed out that
though the Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed an order on 28.12.2005,
there is no explanation at all for taking time for preparation of rejection
letter till 04.01.2006 . In the absence of any explanation by the persons
concerned, 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, State of Tamil Nadu,Prohibition and ExciseDepartment,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, O/o the Colletorate,
Perambalur District, Perambalur.

3. The Superintendent, Special Prison for Women,Tiruchirappalli.

(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.