IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 26/04/2006
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.A.K.SAMPATHKUMAR
Habeas Corpus Petition No.185 of 2006
Poongavanam ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Salem City, Salem.
2.The Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Prohibition and Excise Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. ... Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records of the first
respondent herein in C.M.P.No.32/B.L./Salem City/2005, set aside the order of
detention passed therein dated 16.12.2005 and direct the respondents herein to
produce the detenu by name Chinnadurai before this Court setting him at
liberty now detained in the Central Prison, Salem.
!For Petitioner : Mr.S.Panneerselvam
^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 wife of the detenu by name Chinnadurai, 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
16.12.2005, 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 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 10.01.2006 was received
by the Government on 17.01.2006 and remarks were called for on 18.01.2006.
Thereafter, the remarks were received by the Government on 27.01.2006 and the
File was submitted on 28.01.2006 and the same was dealt with by the Under
Secretary and the Deputy Secretary on 30.01.2006 and finally, the Minister for
Prohibition and Excise passed orders on 31.01.2006. The rejection letter was
prepared on 0 7.0 2.2006 and the same was sent to the detenu on 08.02.2006 and
served to him on 10.02.2006. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel
for the petitioner, though the Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed an
order on 31.01.2006, there is no explanation at all for taking time for
preparation of rejection letter till 07.02.2006. 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.
To
1. The Secretary to the Government, State of Tamil Nadu,Prohibition and
Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Salem city, Salem.
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.
(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.