(Order of this Court was made by P.D.DINAKARAN,J.) The petitioner is the father of the detenu Selvam @ Suresh Kumar.The detenu was incarcerated by order dated 8.4.2007 of the second respondent under the provisions of 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) branding him as a Goonda.Hence, the petitioner seeks a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 8.4.2007 in Cr.M.P.No.5/2007/C1 against his son, who is now confined at Central Prison, Coimbatore, to set aside the same and to direct the respondents to produce the above said detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.The order of detention dated 8.4.2007 came to be passed based on the ground case said to have taken place on 26.2.2007 at 7.30 p.m., on the basis of the complaint lodged by one Sivaprakash on the file of Kavindapadi Police Station.According to the complainant, while he was going along with his wife Thenmalar in his motor cycle towards Kuttiagounden Pudur from Erode, a Tata Sumo Car came speedily and halted, obstructing their way.Three persons came from the car, one was holding a gun and another was having a knife.They demanded the jewels worn by Thenmalar both at gun and knife points.When they refused, one among them snatched the hand bag kept by Thenmalar, which contains a Nokio cell phone, keys of the house and a cash of Rs.450/-.The complainant and his wife raised hue and cry.On hearing their alarm, the public nearby tried to apprehend them on the spot.On seeing the public, the car sped away and the three persons ran in different directions and escaped from the scene of occurrence.In this regard, a case was registered in Crime No.168 of 2007 under Section 392 r/w 397 IPC.During investigation, it was found that one of the three persons is the detenu herein.The detenu was arrested on 13.3.2007 and remanded to judicial custody.The second respondent, taking note of the above case as a ground case and finding that there are six adverse cases pending against the detenu for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC and having satisfied that there is a compelling necessity to detain him in order to prevent him from indulging in the activities which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, ordered his detention dubbing him as a Goonda.The learned counsel for the petitioner challenges the impugned order of detention dated 8.4.2007 mainly on the ground of delay in considering the representation dated 20.4.2007 made on behalf of the detenu, we do not propose to go into the other aspects of the case.But, the file was circulated only on 17.5.2007, with a delay of eight days.The delay in circulating the file by the Government, viz., between 9.5.2007 and 17.5.2007 - a period of eight days, was highlighted by the learned counsel for the petitioner.Even though 12.5.2007 and 13.5.2007 happened to be public holidays, there is no convincing reply on behalf of the State for the delay in circulating the file by the Government.The order of detention dated 8.4.2007 is quashed.The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case.The District Collector and District Magistrate Erode District Erode.The Superintendent Central Prison Coimbatore.The Public Prosecutor, High Court Madras.

Relevant sections: Section 379 in The Indian Penal Code