IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.01.2008
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR
H.C.P.No.436 of 2007
Job Saravanan .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Tamilnadu
rep. by its Secretary to Government
Prohibition & Excise Department
Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2. The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Habeas Corpus as stated therein.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.F.Mohamed Yousuf
For Respondents : Mr.N.R.Elango
Addl. Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by P.D.DINAKARAN,J.)
The second respondent herein clamped an order of detention as against the petitioner/detenu, as the said authority arrived at the subjective satisfaction that the said detenu is a Goonda and he has to be detained under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Officers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982).
2.1.According to the prosecution the detenu has swindled a mind blowing and whooping sum of Rs.17 Crores from innocent builders, under religious cover, in the guise of constructing dwelling houses for the poor people. Prosecution case is as follows :-
2.2.The petitioner/detenu Job Saravanan, with an alleged mission to provide house for poor people in the State of Tamil Nadu formed a Trust in the name of “M/s.International Calvary Mission Trust” along with his associates. The detenu was the President of the Trust and his associates were the individual trustees. The modus operandi of the detenu and his associates was to advertise in major dailies about their object of constructing dwelling houses for the poor public free of cost using foreign aids. The gullible builders, lured by the advertisement, approached the detenu and his associates and they were impressed upon that foreign aid is going to be pumped in the project and poor people will be offered dwelling houses free of cost. The detenu and his men churned out this story to every builder, who fell prey. As Lump sum security deposit, every builder was forced to part with a sizable amount of money, running into several lakhs of rupees. When some of the builders confronted the detenu, they were given cheques, which when deposited bounced back. After their patience ran out, other builders approached the detenu and his associates only to be rebuked. Complaints were filed thick and fast all over the state of Tamil Nadu and cases were registered in Central Crime Branch, Team-1, “X” Crime Nos.712, 716 and 717 of 2007 originally for offences under Section 406 and 420 IPC and subsequently, Sections of law were altered to 406, 420, 336, 307 and 506(2) IPC. Detenu’s associates were arrested on different dates and the detenu was arrested on 06.12.2006. Based on the confession given by the detenu, number of cars, agreements and cash and documents running to several lakhs were recovered.
2.3.According to the Detaining Authority, the detenu has cheated about 309 persons and abused the religious position as Rev.Father. He has thus hurt the religious sentiments of the people also and acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
2.4.The detaining authority, having satisfied that there is compelling necessity to detain the detenu in order to prevent him from indulging in activities which are prejudicial to maintenance of public order, passed the impugned order.
3.Challenging the said detention, the detenu himself has preferred this Habeas Corpus Petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to direct the respondents to produce him before this Court, now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and to call for the records of the respondents relating to the order of detention vide proceedings No.18/2007, dated 24.1.2007, to set aside the same and to set the detenu at liberty.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.R.Elango, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
5. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that even though as per the detention order the detenu was arrested on 6.12.2006, in the representation dated 16.2.2007 made on behalf of the detenu, it is specifically stated that the detenu was arrested even on 12.11.2006 itself and the said point was not at all considered by the Government while disposing the said representation, and therefore, the order of detention is vitiated.
6. A perusal of the detention order discloses that the detenu was arrested on 6.12.2006. However, in the representation dated 16.2.2007 made on behalf of the detenu, it is clearly stated that he was arrested on 12.11.2006 and not on 6.12.2006 and that he was kept under illegal custody of the respondents for a period of 24 days. This grievance of the detenu as to his illegal detention from 12.11.2006 to 5.12.2006 was not at all considered by the Government, while disposing of the representation dated 16.2.2007 by proceedings dated 7.3.2007. In our considered opinion, the non-consideration of the said vital aspect of the case, viz., as to the date of the arrest, when a serious dispute is raised, vitiates the detention order.
For the reason aforesaid, the impugned order of detention is vitiated and as such, the same is liable to be set aside and accordingly, the order of detention dated 24.1.2007 is set aside and this petition is allowed. The petitioner/detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required connection with in any other crime. No costs. Consequently, M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2007 are closed.
(P.D.D.J.)(P.R.S.J.)
22.01.2008
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
sra
To:
1. The Secretary to Government
State of Tamilnadu
Prohibition and Excise Department
Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2. The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Madras.
P.D.DINAKARAN,J.
AND
P.R.SHIVAKUMAR,J.
(sra)
H.C.P.No.436 of 2007
22.01.2008