Rajeswari vs The State Of Tamil Nadu
2023 Latest Caselaw 13689 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 13689 Mad
Judgement Date : 10 October, 2023

Madras High Court

Rajeswari vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 10 October, 2023

                                                                          H.C.P.No.1106 of 2023

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 10.10.2023

                                                      CORAM :

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
                                                           AND
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                                 H.C.P.No.1106 of 2023

                     Rajeswari                                            ... Petitioner

                                                           Vs.

                     1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
                       By its Additional Chief Secretary to Government,
                       Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
                       Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

                     2.The Commissioner of Police,
                       Greater Chennai,
                       Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

                     3.The Superintendent,
                       Central Prison, Puzhal,
                       Chennai.

                     4.The Inspector of Police,
                       H8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station,
                       Chennai.                                            ... Respondents




                     Page 1 of 6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                   H.C.P.No.1106 of 2023




                     Prayer : Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
                     of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the
                     records of the second respondent herein pertaining to the detention order
                     made in BCDFGISSSV.No.197/2023 dated 30.05.2023 and quash the same
                     and direct the respondents to produce the body of the detenu namely
                     Krishna @ Krishna Murthy aged about 22 years, now detained in Central
                     Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Honble Court and set the detenu at
                     liberty forthwith.




                                       For Petitioner         :     Mr.V.Saravanan

                                       For Respondents        :     Mr.E.Raj Thilak
                                                                    Additional Public Prosecutor



                                                         ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J.)

The petitioner, mother of the detenu Krishna @ Krishna Murthy,

S/o.Ganesan, has come forward with this petition challenging the detention

order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 30.05.2023 slapped on her son,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.No.1106 of 2023

branding him as "Goonda" under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous

Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas,

Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video

Pirates Act, 1982 [Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982].

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

3.Though several grounds are raised in the petition, the learned

counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is a delay in passing the order

of detention. In the present case, though the detenu was arrested on

24.04.2023, the Detention Order was passed only on 30.05.2023.

4.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushantha Kumar

Banik Vs. State of Tripura and Others reported in AIR 2022 SC 4715, has

dealt with similar situation and has held in paragraph No.21 as follows:-

“In the present case, the circumstances indicate that the detaining authority after the receipt of the proposal from the sponsoring authority was indifferent in

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.No.1106 of 2023

passing the order of detention with greater promptitude. The “live and proximate link” between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention stood snapped in arresting the detenu. More importantly the delay has not been explained in any manner & though this point of delay was specifically raised & argued before the High Court as evident from Para 14 of the impugned judgment yet the High Court has not recorded any finding on the same.”

5.The Hon'ble Supreme Court was persuaded to allow the Appeal

filed before it mainly on the ground that delay in passing the Order of

Detention from the date of the proposal would snap the ''live and proximate

link'' between prejudicial activities and the purpose of detention. Therefore,

failure on the part of the Detaining Authority in explaining such delay as in

the present case also is a valid ground for quashing the Detention Order.

6.In view of the aforesaid reason, the detention order passed by the 2nd

respondent dated 30.05.2023 in No.197/BCDFGISSSV/2023, is hereby set

aside and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu viz., Krishna

@ Krishna Murthy, S/o.Ganesan, aged about 22 years, is directed to be set

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis H.C.P.No.1106 of 2023

at liberty forthwith unless he is required in connection with any other case.

(S.S.S.R., J.) (S.M., J.) 10.10.2023 mkn

Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

4.The Inspector of Police, H8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai.