Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

K Sasikala vs State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By Secretary To Government And Others

Madras High Court|08 March, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 08.03.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH H.C.P No.1760 of 2016 K. Sasikala, W/o. Thurkkarao Petitioner Vs
1. State of Tamil Nadu represented By Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009
2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Chennai. .. Respondents Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 19.07.2016 in BCDFGISSSV No. 725 of 2016 against my husband Thurkkarao, Son of, Krishna, Male, aged 30 years and now my husband was confined at Central Prison, Puzhal and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the body of detenu before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty.
For Appellant : Mr.J. Ganesh For 1st respondent: Mr.V.M.R. Rajendran Addl. Public Prosecutor ORDER [Order of the Court was made by S. NAGAMUTHU,J.,] The petitioner, who is the wife of the detenu-Thurkkarao has come up with this habeas corpus petition, challenging the detention order passed against Thurkkarao by the second respondent, vide proceedings in BCDFGISSSV No. 725 of 2016 dated 19.07.2016.
2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and we have also perused the records carefully.
3. Though, several grounds were raised in the petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would mainly focus on the ground that though there was no bail application pending in Crime Nos.1379 of 2016 and 1592 of 2016 the detaining authority has stated that the relatives of the detenu were taking steps to file bail application, in which case there was real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. The learned counsel pointed out that to arrive at such a conclusion, there was no material placed before the detaining authority at all.
4. The learned Additional Public prosecutor would submit that in the Special report submitted by the Inspector of Police, there is a statement to the effect that the relatives of the detenu were taking steps to file bail application seeking bail in connection with the case in Crime Nos.1379 of 2016 and 1592 of 2016.
5. We have considered the above submissions.
Admittedly, as on the date of passing of the detention order, there was no application filed by the detenu seeking bail in Crime Nos.1379 of 2016 and 1821 of 2016, on the file of Selaiyur Police Station. Though it is alleged that his relatives were taking steps to file an application for bail, there were no materials available before the detaining authority, except the report of the Inspector of Police. Even the report of the Inspector of Police does not spell out as to how he came to know that the relatives were taking steps to file application seeking bail. Full details as to who are those relatives, who were taking steps to file bail application also have not been mentioned. Thus, in our considered view, without making proper application of mind relating to these facts, the detaining authority has passed the detention order. Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the same.
6. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned detention order, dated 19.07.2016, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu is directed to be released forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.
Index : Yes/no Internet : Yes/no sr To
1. The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009
2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Chennai.
(S.N.J.,) (A.S.M.J.,) 08-03-2017
S.NAGAMUTHU,J.
And
ANITA SUMANTH,J.,
sr Order in H.C.P.No.1760 of 2016 08-03-2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

K Sasikala vs State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By Secretary To Government And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
08 March, 2017
Judges
  • S Nagamuthu
  • Anita Sumanth