TITLE: Rajamani Vs. Principal Secretary Tamil Nadu State, and others
Decided On: July 11, 2023
H.C.P(MD)No.1753 of 2022
CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. M.S. Ramesh and M. Nirmal Kumar.
Introduction:
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus calling for the entire records connected with the detention order of the second respondent in No.72/BCDFGISSSV/2022 dated 13.09.2022 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu or body of the detenu namely Kannan @ Kuruvi Kannan, S/o.Selvakumar, aged about 25 years, detained as ‘Goonda’ in Central Prison, Madurai and now confined at District Jail at Dindigul before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.
Facts:
The petitioner is the sister of the detenu viz., Kannan @ Kuruvi Kannan, S/o.Selvakumar, aged about 25 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by order in No.72/BCDFGISSSV/2022 dated 13.09.2022, holding him to be a ‘Goonda’, as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
Legal Analysis and Decision:
As seen from the grounds of detention, it is clear that though the detenu was arrested on 19.07.2022, the order of detention came to be passed only on 13.09.2022 and hence, there is an abnormal delay in passing theorder of Detention, which caused prejudice to the interest of the detenu. We have gone through the entire materials placed on record. There is no satisfactory explanation offered by the Detaining Authority for the delay in passing the order of detention. Hence the impugned order of detention is liable to be set aside. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in No.72/BCDFGISSSV/2022 dated 13.09.2022, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Kannan @ Kuruvi Kannan, S/o.Selvakumar, aged about 25 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
Conclusion:
The detention order is mainly attacked on the ground that there is a delay in passing the order of detention. the detention order was passed only on 13.09.2022 i.e., after a considerable delay of nearly two months. Therefore, the detention order was set aside, and the detenu, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY JANGAM SHASHIDHAR.
