IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 31.07.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN H.C.P.No.361 of 2017 Govindan .. Petitioner Vs
1. Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise [XVI] Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2. The District Collector and District Magistrate, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District. .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, to call for the records in S.C.No.01/2017 dated 25.01.2017 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to produce the body of the detenu Sathish, aged 26 years, S/o.Murugan, now confined in Central Prison, Salem before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Subhadra Devi For Respondents : Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R [Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to call for records relating to the detention order passed in S.C.No.01/2017 dated 25.01.2017 by the Detaining Authority against the detenu by name, Sathish, aged 26 years, S/o.Murugan, residing at Kumbarapettai, Hosur, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District and quash the same.
2. The Inspector of Police, Hosur Town Police Station as Sponsoring Authority has submitted an affidavit to the Detaining Authority, wherein, it is averred to the effect that the detenu has involved in the following adverse cases :
3. Further, it is averred in the affidavit that on 20.11.2016, one Magamuni, S/o.Pandi, as de facto complainant has given a complaint to the Sub Inspector of Police, Hosur Town Police Station, wherein, it is stated to the effect that in the place of occurrence by showing a knife, the detenu has tried to avulse the two-wheeler of the de facto complainant. Further, it is stated in the complaint that the detenu has caused panic in the minds of the public and consequently, a case has been registered in Crime No.719/2016 under Section 392 of Indian Penal Code and ultimately, requested the Detaining Authority to invoke Act 14 of 1982 against the detenu.
4. The Detaining Authority after considering the averments made in the affidavit and other connected documents, has arrived at a subjective satisfaction to the effect that the detenu is a habitual offender and ultimately, branded him as goonda by way of passing the impugned Detention Order and in order to quash the same, the present petition has been filed by the father of the detenu as petitioner.
5. Despite repeated adjournments granted to the respondents, counter has not been filed. Under such circumstances, the present petition is disposed of on the basis of available materials on record.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended to the effect that on the side of the detenu, a representation has been submitted to the concerned authorities and the same has not been disposed of without delay and therefore, the Detention Order in question is liable to be quashed.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has contended to the effect that the representation submitted on the side of the detenu has been duly disposed of without delay and therefore, the contention urged on the side of the detenu is liable to be rejected.
8. On the side of the respondents, a proforma has been submitted, wherein, it has been clearly stated that in between column Nos.7 and 9, 43 clear working days are available and in between column Nos.12 and 13, 29 clear working days are available and no explanation has been given on the side of the respondents with regard to such a huge delay and the same would affect the rights of the detenu guaranteed under Article 22[5] of the Constitution of India and therefore, the Detention Order in question is liable to be quashed.
9. In fine, this petition is allowed. The Detention Order dated 25.01.2017 passed in S.C.No.01/2017 by the Detaining Authority against the detenu by name, Sathish, aged 26 years, S/o.Murugan is quashed and directed to set him at liberty forthwith, unless he is required to be incarcerated in any other case.
gya To
1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise [XVI] Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2. The District Collector and District Magistrate, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
[A.S., J.] [P.K., J.] 31.07.2017 A.SELVAM, J.
and P.KALAIYARASAN, J.
gya H.C.P.No.361 of 2017 31.07.2017