The High Court quashed a preventive detention order under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 due to an unexplained delay of four days in considering the detainee's representation, violating Article 22(5) and inflicting rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Impugned detention order quashed; Habeas Corpus Petition allowed; Detainee set at liberty forthwith.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.06.2014
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.DHANAPALAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM
H.C.P.No.2343 of 2013
B.Vedhamani S/o Balu
... Petitioner
vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition & Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. ... Respondents
Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the detaining authority to produce the detainee, the petitioner's brother B.Sathish, S/o Balu, aged about 24 years, now detained under Act 14 of 1982, after having been declared as a “Goonda” by preventive detention order dated 29.08.2013 in BDFGISSV No.845 of 2013, presently confined in Central Prison, Puzhal,Chennai, quash and set aside the same and set the detainee at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.A.Dhanasekar For Respondents: Mr.P.Govindarajan Addl. Public Prosecutor O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by V.Dhanapalan,J.)
The petitioner is the brother of the detenu. The detenu has been branded as a "Goonda" under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and detained under the order of the 2nd respondent passed in Memo No.845/BDFGISSV/2013, dated 29.08.2013.
| S.No. | Police | Station and Crime No. | Section | s of Law | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | S-5, Station |
Pallavaram Police Crime No.3998/2012 |
147, r/w IPC. |
148, 363 34 and |
, 302 r/w 149 302 r/w 201 |
| 2 | S-5, Station |
Pallavaram Police Crime No.368/2013 |
147, (ii) |
294(b), IPC. |
384 and 506 |
| 3 | S-5, | Pallavaram Police |
341, | 294(b), | 392 r/w 397, |
| Station | Crime No.381/2013 | 427, | 336 and | 506(ii) IPC. |
The ground case alleged against the detenu is one registered on 14.08.2013 by the Inspector of Police, S-5, Pallavaram Police Station Crime No.1011/2013 for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 392 r/w 397, 336, 427 & 506(ii) IPC.
quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu, namely Sathish S/o Balu, in this case is set at liberty forthwith, unless his custody is required in connection with any other case.
Sd/Asst. Registrar(CS IV ) Dt.09/07/14
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar.
gr.
To:
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition & Excise Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600009.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
3..The Superintendent,Central Prison,Puzhal,Chennai
4.The Joint Secretary to Government,
Public [Law & Order] ,
Fort St. George, Chennai 9.
5.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai 600 104.
+1cc to Mr.B.A. Dhanasekar ,Advocate SR.No.25271
RJ(CO)
ka 14/07
Order in
H.C.P.No.2343 of 2013
Dated: 17.06.2014
2 issues framed by the court
Whether inordinate and unexplained delay in considering a detainee's representation vitiates the preventive detention order under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
Whether such a breach of Article 22(5) infringement makes the detention order unconstitutional under Article 21.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
B.Vedhamani
State of Tamil Nadu
Commissioner of Police
V.Dhanapalan
G.Chockalingam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
