In the High Court of Judicature at Madras
Dated:18.04.2006
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. SATHASIVAM
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.A.K. SAMPATHKUMAR
HCP.No.82 of 2006
Tmt. Saradham .. Petitioner
-Vs-
1. State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by its Secretary
Prohibition & Excise Department
Government of Tamil Nadu
Fort St. George
Chennai 600 009.
2. The District Magistrate &
District Collector
Perambalur District
Perambalur. .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for issuance of writ of habeas corpus as stated therein.
For petitioner : Mr. S. Kamadevan
For respondents : Mr. Abudukumar Rajaratrhinam
Govt., Advocate (Crl.)
:ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by P. SATHASIVAM,J.,)
The petitioner by name Saradham, challenges the impugned order
of detention dated 31.10.2005, detaining her son Vebhushanan, as “Boot-Legger”
under Section 3 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of
Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic
Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (in short ” Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982″).
2. Heard both sides.
3. Even at the foremost the learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that there was inordinate delay in considering the
representation of the detenu, which vitiates the ultimate order of detention.
With reference to the said claim the learned Government Advocate has placed
details, which show that the representation of the detenue dated 10.01.2006
was received by the Government on 13.01.2006 and remarks were called on
16.01.2006, remarks were received on 27.01.2006. After receipt of the
remarks, the same was dealt with by the Under Secretary and the Deputy
Secretary on 30.01.2006; order was passed by the Minister for Prohibition and
Excise on 31.01.2006, rejection letter was prepared on 07.02.2006; the same
was sent to the detenu on 08.02 .2006 and the rejection letter was served on
the detenu on 11.02.2006 . As rightly pointed out though the concerned
Minister has passed an order on 31.01.2006, there is no explanation or reason
for not forwarding the same to the detenu till 11.02.2006. In the absence of
any explanation, we hold that the delay between 31.01.2006 and 11.02.200 6 is
enormous. On this ground, the impugned detention order is vitiated and the
same is quashed; accordingly, this petition is allowed. The order of
detention impugned in the petition is set aside and the detenu is directed to
be set at liberty forthwith from the custody unless he is required in
connection with any other case.
To
1. The Secretary to Government
Prohibition & Excise Department
Government of Tamil Nadu
Fort St. George
Chennai 600 009.
2. The District Magistrate &
District Collector
Perambalur District.
3. The Director General of Police
Chennai 4.
4. The Superintendent
Central Prison, Trichy.
5. The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Madras.