1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE CHITRA VENKATARAMAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.SUDANTHIRAM H.C.P.(MD) No.52 of 2011 Rameshkumari .. Petitioner versus 1.The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition & Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600009. 2.The District Magistrate and District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison, Madurai. .. Respondents Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the entire records connected with the detention order of Respondent No.2 in Cr.M.P.No.01/2011 (GOONDA) dated 13.01.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the petitioner's husband by name Kanagaraj, Son of Ganesan, aged about 28 years, detained in Madurai Central Prison, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith. For petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For respondents : Mr.S.P.Samuelraj, Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER (Order of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.) Challenge is made to the order of detention passed by the second respondent in his Proceedings Cr.M.P.No.01/2011 (Goonda) dated 13.01.2011, whereby the petitioner's husband by name Kanagaraj was ordered to be detained under the provisions of 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 14/1982) branding him as a "Goonda". 2.Learned counsel for the petitioner challenges the impugned order of detention on the ground that there was delay on the part of the detaining authority in considering the representation of the detenu. 3.It is seen from the proforma produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor before this Court that in respect of the representation of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the detenu dated 18.01.2011 received on 24.01.2011, even though the Minister for Law, Courts and Prisons dealt with the same on 08.02.2011, rejection letter was prepared only on 14.02.2011 and the same was sent to the detenu on 15.02.2011. In between 08.02.2011, the date on which the Minister for Law dealt with the representation, and 14.02.2011, the date on which the rejection letter was prepared, 12.02.2011 and 13.02.2011 happen to be Government holidays. Thus there was a delay of 3 days, i.e. 09.02.2011, 10.02.2011 and 11.02.2011, in considering the representation of the detenu, which remains unexplained. 4. Such unexplained delay in considering the representation would amount to deprivation of making effective representation guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and therefore, the impugned order of detention certainly calls for interference, by this Court. Hence, we have no hesitation in setting aside the order of detention. 5. In view of the above, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention passed by the second respondent in his Proceedings Cr.M.P.No.01/2011 (Goonda) dated 13.01.2011 is quashed. The detenu is directed to be released forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Secretary to the Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat,Chennai-600 009. 2. The District Magistrate and District Collector, Virudhunagar District,Virudhunagar. 3. The Superintendent of Prison, Madurai Central Prison,Madurai. 4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order), Fort St.George, Chennai – 9. H.C.P.(MD) No.52 of 2011 03.03.2011 KM PA/10.03.2011/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/