Madras High Court
Krishnan vs The Secretary To The Government on 18 October, 2024
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam, V.Sivagnanam
HCP.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.10.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
H.C.P.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
Krishnan ... Petitioner in H.C.P.No.2489 of 2024
Prakash ... Petitioner in H.C.P.No.2490 of 2024
Vs.
1.The Secretary to the Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.District Collector and District Magistrate of
Ranipet District, Ranipet.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Ranipet District, Ranipet.
4.The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Vellore.
5.The Inspector of Police,
Walajapet Police Station,
Ranipet District. ... Respondents in both petitions
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
HCP.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
PRAYER in H.C.P.No.2489 of 2024: Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, call for the
records in Connection with the order of Detention passed by the Second
respondent dated 26.02.2024 in B3 D.O.No.11/2024 Petitioner/Detenue
Krishnan Male aged 38 years S/o.Mani who is confined at Central Prison
Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the
detenue before the Court and set him at Liberty.
PRAYER in H.C.P.No.2490 of 2024: Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, call for the
records in Connection with the order of Detention passed by the Second
respondent dated 26.02.2024 in B3 D.O.No.10/2024 Petitioner/Detenue
Prakash, Male aged 41 years S/o.Mani who is confined at Central Prison
Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the
detenue before the Court and set him at Liberty.
(In both petitions)
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Raman for Mr.D.Balaji
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor
COMMON ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
The order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings
B3 D.O.No.11/2024 and B3 D.O.No.10/2024 dated 26.02.2024 is sought
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
HCP.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
to be quashed in the present Habeas Corpus Petitions.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is an
inordinate delay in passing the order of detention.
4. In the instant case, the detenus were arrested on 30.01.2024 and
thereafter, the detention order came to be passed on 26.02.2024. This fact
is not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
5. In the case of 'Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura',
reported in '2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813', when there was an inordinate delay
from the date of proposal till passing of the detention order and likewise,
between the date of detention order and the actual arrest, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court had held that the live and proximate link, between the
grounds and the purpose of detention, stands snapped in arresting the
detenu. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is extracted
hereunder:-
“20. It is manifestly clear from a conspectus of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
HCP.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
above decisions of this Court, that the underlying principle is
that if there is unreasonable delay between the date of the
order of detention & actual arrest of the detenu and in the
same manner from the date of the proposal and passing of the
order of detention, such delay unless satisfactorily explained
throws a considerable doubt on the genuineness of the
requisite subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority in
passing the detention order and consequently render the
detention order bad and invalid because the “live and
proximate link” between the grounds of detention and the
purpose of detention is snapped in arresting the detenu. A
question whether the delay is unreasonable and stands
unexplained depends on the facts and circumstances of each
case.”
6. Drawing inspiration from the judgment in Sushanta Kumar
Banik's case, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of 'Gomathi
Vs. Principal Secretary to Government and Others', reported in '2023
SCC OnLine Mad 6332', had held that when there is an inordinate delay
from the date of arrest/date of proposal till the order of detention, the live
and proximate link between them would also stand snapped and thereby,
had quashed the detention order on this ground.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
HCP.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
7. In yet another case i.e., in 'Nagaraj Vs. State of Tamil Nadu',
reported in '(2018) 3 MWN (Cri) 428', this Court had held that the delay
of 36 days in passing the detention order after the arrest of the detenu
would snap the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose
of detention. Hence, in view of the unexplained and inordinate delay in
passing the order of detention, after the arrest of the detenu, the detention
order in the present case, is liable to be quashed.
8. Accordingly, the detention orders passed by the second respondent
in B3 D.O.No.11/2024 and B3 D.O.No.10/2024 dated 26.02.2024, are
hereby set aside and the Habeas Corpus Petitions areallowed. The detenu
viz., Krishnan Male aged 38 years S/o.Mani who is confined at Central
Prison, Vellore and Prakash, Male aged 41 years S/o.Mani who is confined
at Central Prison Vellore are directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless
their confinement is required in connection with any other case.
[S.M.S., J.] [V.S.G., J.]
18.10.2024
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
HCP.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
gd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
HCP.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
gd
To
1.The Secretary to the Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.District Collector and District Magistrate of
Ranipet District, Ranipet.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Ranipet District, Ranipet.
4.The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Vellore.
5.The Inspector of Police,
Walajapet Police Station,
Ranipet District.
6.The Joint Secretary to Government
Public (Law and Order),
Fort ST.George, Chennai – 9.
7.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court.
H.C.P.Nos.2489 & 2490 of 2024
18.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
