(Order of the Court was made by RAJIV SHAKDER, J)
1.This is a petition seeks to challenge the detention order dated 13.06.2017. In the detention order, three (3) adverse cases (Crime No.1444/2017, Crime No.1445/2017 and Crime No.460/2017) have been noted qua the detenu. Insofar as the subject case is concerned (Crime No.461 of 2017), the detenu has been booked under
Sections 341,294(b),336,427,397 and
506(ii) IPC.
2. Notice in this petition was issued on 11.10.2017. Despite opportunities, being given to the State, no counter affidavit has been filed to date. Therefore, the assertions made in the petition have remained uncontroverted.
3. A perusal of the detention order would show that one of the reasons, which has propelled the Detaining Authority in passing the impugned order, is that there is a likelihood of the detenu being enlarged on bail.
4. Having perused the detention order and records, we find that the Detaining Authority itself notes that the bail application moved in the subject case (Cime No.461 of 2017) is pending. The only reason, for coming to the conclusion that the detenu may be released on bail, as indicated in the impugned order, is that the relatives of the detenu are taking steps to file a bail application. According to us, this cannot be the reason to detain the detenu.
4.1. Furthermore, it is noted by the Detaining Authority that in a similar case (Crime No.1709 of 2015), bail was granted by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.15367 of 2015. According to us, even this cannot furnish a reason for detaining the detenu.
4.2. Besides, what is indicated, we note that the detenu was arrested on 16.05.2017, whereas, the impugned order was passed nearly a month later i.e., 13.06.2017. There has been undue delay in passing the impugned order. This is another reason, we are of the view of that, the impugned order cannot be sustained. It is ordered accordingly.
5. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in No.344/BCDFGISSSV/2017 dated 13.06.2017, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Srikanth, S/o.Soundharajan, male, aged about 26 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. Given the nature of the case, this order will be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent by the Registrar General of this Court via Fax.