Madras High Court
Syed Al Azil vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By Its on 7 March, 2025
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S. Ramesh
HCP.No.251 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.03.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR
H.C.P.No.251 of 2025
Syed Al Azil
Petitioner(s) /brother of the detenue
Vs
1. State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By Its
Additional Chief Secretary To
Government, Home, Prohibition And
Excise Department, Secretariat,
Chennai-60 0009.
2.The Commissioner Of Police
Greater Chennai.
3.The Inspector Of Police
Enforcement Bureau And Prohibition
Enforcement Wing, Adayar Unit,
Chennai.
4.The Superintendent
Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records, relating to
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 02:34:20 pm )
HCP.No.251 of 2025
petitioner's brother detention under Tamilnadu Act 14 of 1982 vide
detention order dated 14.11.2024 on the file of the second respondent herein
made in proceedings No.1127/BCDFGISSSV/2024 and quash the same as
illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the said
petitioner's brother namely Syed Al Ameer, aged 33 years, son of Kasim,
before this Court and set him at liberty, now petitioner's brother detained at
Central prison, Puzhal, Chennai-600 066.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.C.Chellappan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj
Additional Public Prosecutor
assisted by Mr.M.Sylvester John
ORDER
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.
The petitioner herein, who is the brother of the detenu, Syed Al
Ameer, aged 33 years, son of Kasim, has come forward with this petition
challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent dated
14.11.2024 slapped on his brother, branding him as "Drug Offender" under
the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber
Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral
Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers and
Video Pirates Act, 1982 [Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982].
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 02:34:20 pm )
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as 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 an inordinate delay in
passing the order of detention.
4. In the instant case, the detenu was arrested on 08.10.2024 and
thereafter, the detention order came to be passed on 14.11.2024. 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:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 02:34:20 pm )
“20. It is manifestly clear from a conspectus of the 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 ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 02:34:20 pm )
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 order passed by the second respondent
on 14.11.2024 in No.1127/BCDFGISSSV/2024, is hereby set aside and the
Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu viz., Syed Al Ameer, aged 33
years, son of Kasim, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his
confinement is required in connection with any other case.
[M.S.R., J] [N.S., J]
07.03.2025
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet: Yes/No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Anu
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 02:34:20 pm )
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.
Anu
To
1.The Additional Chief Secretary To
Government, Home, Prohibition And
Excise Department, Secretariat,
Chennai-60 0009.
2.The Commissioner Of Police
Greater Chennai.
3.The Inspector Of Police
Enforcement Bureau And Prohibition
Enforcement Wing, Adayar Unit,
Chennai.
4.The Superintendent
Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
5.The Joint Secretary,
Law and Order Department,
Secretariat, Chennai
6.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
07.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/03/2025 02:34:20 pm )
