IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 12.09.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN H.C.P.No.689 of 2017 R.Valliammal .. Petitioner Vs
1. The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai-7. .. 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 connection with the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent dated 20.04.2017 in memo No.192/BCDFGISSSV/2017 against the petitioner's husband, Ramesh, aged 37 years, S/o.Asaithambi, who is confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Paarthiban 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 No.192/BCDFGISSSV/2017 dated 20.04.2017 by the Detaining Authority against the detenu by name, Ramesh, aged 37 years, S/o.Asaithambi, residing at No.1/221, Keelastreet, Melapoovani, Srivaikundam, Tuticorin District and quash the same.
2. The Inspector of Police, S-13 Chrompet 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 case :
i. Kovilpatti West Police Station Crime No.368/2012 registered under Sections 149, 452, 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Further, it is averred in the affidavit that one Abdul Kadhar, aged 64 years, S/o.Khaja Moideen, residing at No.38, Periyapalayathamman Koil Street, Pallavaram, Chennai-43, as de facto complainant has given a complaint in Chrompet Police Station, wherein, it is alleged to the effect that on 12.01.2017, the present detenu and others have forcibly entered into a shop of the son of the de facto complainant, brutally attacked and murdered him. Under such circumstances, a case has been registered in Crime No.77/2017 under Sections 147, 148 and 302 of the 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 wife of the detenu as petitioner.
5. On the side of the respondents, counter has not been filed and therefore, the present Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of on merits 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, but 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 is clearly stated that in between column Nos.7 to 9, 6 clear working days are available and in between column Nos.12 and 13, 24 clear working days are available and no explanation has been given on the side of the respondents with regard to such 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 20.04.2017 passed in No.192/BCDFGISSSV/2017 by the Detaining Authority against the detenu by name, Ramesh, aged 37 years, S/o.Asaithambi 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 Joint Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public [Law and Order] Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.
2. The Secretary to the Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.
3. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai-7.
4. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
[in duplicate for communication to the detenu]
5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
[A.S., J.] [P.K., J.] 12.09.2017 A.SELVAM, J.
and P.KALAIYARASAN, J.
gya H.C.P.No.689 of 2017 12.09.2017