Madras High Court
Boominathan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 January, 2023
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 09.01.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
Boominathan ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its
The Principal Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City.
3.The Inspector of Police (L&O),
B-3 Theppakulam Police Station,
Madurai City.
4.The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison,
Madurai. ... Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a
writ of Habeas Corpus, call for the records relating to the detention order passed
by the second respondent in No.44/BCDFGISSSV/2022, dated 24.06.2022 and
quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the
petitioner's son (detenu) namely as Senbhagamoorthy, aged about 28 years (Now
detained at Central Prison, Madurai) before this Court and set him at liberty.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.P.Muthupandian
For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
AND
SUNDER MOHAN,J.
This petition is filed to quash the detention order passed by the second
respondent on 24.06.2022. The petitioner is the father of the detenu.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the booklet was not
furnished to the detenu to make an effective representation. Hence, on behalf of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
the detenu, two representations were made; one on 13.07.2022 and another on
30.07.2022. However, both the representations were rejected for identical reason
without any application of mind.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the judgment of this
Court rendered in Selvi vs. State of Tamil Nadu, dated 25.02.2020 submitted that
though the detenu has not filed any bail petition in the ground case, referring an
un-similar case were the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai has granted
bail to the co-accused by name Palanikumar in a case involved in the offence
under Sections 392 r/w 397, 306(ii) IPC, submitted that there is non application
of mind in the detention order.
4. However, on a perusal of the detention order, this Court finds that the
detaining authority has recorded his knowledge that the detenue has not preferred
any bail application in the ground case and the fact that Court has granted bail in
a similar set of facts in the case of Palanikumar. We see there is a balanced
application of mind in considering the matter properly and arrived at the
subjective satisfaction from the given material. Hence, we find that the judgment
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
of this Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable
to the facts of the present case.
5. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the judgment
of this Court rendered in Pathiyanathan vs. The District Collector and District
Magistrate, Tiruppur and another in H.C.P.No.2446 of 2017, dated 14.03.2018
submitted that the detenu was arrested in the case on 11.05.2022 by B3
Theppakulam Police Station in Cr.No.209 of 2022, whereas, the detention order
was passed belatedly with an inordinate delay, therefore, the findings of the
Division Bench in Pathiyanathan's case squarely applies to the case.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents
filed a detailed counter stating that the allegation, booklet was not served to the
petitioner is not correct. In fact, the paper booklet was served on 25.06.2022 after
getting due acknowledgment. The representation of the petitioner, dated
13.07.2022 was considered and rejected with reasons. There is no application
pending before the Government that too, after the matter seized off by the
Advisory Board. In this case, the Advisory Board was constituted and the detenu
was heard on 09.07.2022 and confirmed the detention. The representation, dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
30.07.2022 is only a representation in duplicate and it is no bearing on the
application of mind of the detaining authority in exercising his jurisdiction.
7. This Court on verifying the records find that the petitioner involved in 5
previous cases, which leads to the registration of the complaint under Sections
392 and 397 IPC. The detaining authority has expressed his opinion that there is
a possibility of the detenu coming out on bail and the public peace is under peril
due to the conduct of the detenu. We see no infirmity in the detention order.
8. This Court finds that the background facts of this case is not same to the
other case cited supra. Each case has to be decided independently on applying the
mind to the facts available. In this case, the petitioner started his life by doing
small time theft involving the offence under Section 379 IPC., gradually he
became notorious involving in chain snatching and causing hurt. Therefore, his
presence is a menace to the public, as per the detaining authority. This wisdom is
based on the document and therefore, the detention order cannot be quashed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
9. Further, the grounds raised challenging the detention order is not
sustainable in view of the fact that the detenue has received the paper booklet as
early as on 25.06.2022 and he has made his representation on 13.07.2022 and the
same has been duly considered and rejected. We find no merit to entertain the
habeas corpus petition, hence, this habeas corpus petition is dismissed.
[G.J.,J.] [S.M.,J.]
Index : Yes / No 09.01.2023
Internet : Yes / No
am
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
To
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City.
3.The Inspector of Police (L&O),
B-3 Theppakulam Police Station,
Madurai City.
4.The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison,
Madurai.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
AND
SUNDER MOHAN,J.
am
H.C.P.(MD) No.1422 of 2022
09.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
