IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.03.2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.MURUGESAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH H.C.P.No.1411 of 2007 M.Madhaiyan .. Petitioner -vs- 1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Fort St.George Chennai 600 009 2. The Commissioner of Police Salem City Salem District .. Respondents Petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, praying for the issue of Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the order of detention of the 2nd respondent dated 13.8.2007 in C.M.P.No.23/BL/Salem City/2007 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Hon'ble Court and set the petitioner, M.Madhaiyan, Son of M.Mariappan, Detenu No.2848 now confined in Salem Central Jail at liberty. For Petitioner :: Mrs.R.Subadra Devi for Mr.K.Selvaraj For Respondents :: Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran Addl. Public Prosecutor ORDER (Order of the Court was delivered by D.MURUGESAN, J.) The petitioner is the detenu against whom the detention order dated 13.8.2007 came to be passed branding him as a 'Bootlegger' under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. Questioning the detention order, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was not given sufficient opportunity to put forth his case before the Advisory Board. According to the petitioner, notice of hearing before the Advisory Board dated 11.9.2007 was served on the petitioner on 14.9.2007 at 12.30 p.m. As 15.9.2007 and 16.9.2007 happened to be Saturday and Sunday and 17.9.2007 was not a visitors https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ day, the petitioner did not have any opportunity to contact either his relative or counsel to get sufficient instructions before appearing before the Advisory Board. 2. We have heard Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents also. 3. It is not in dispute that the visitors are allowed to meet the detenus only on Tuesday and Thursday of every week. In this case, the detenu was served with the notice of hearing before the Advisory Board only on 14.9.2007 at 12.30 p.m. Even assuming that the detenu could have informed his relative or counsel as to the hearing on 17.9.2007, he did not have such a chance to meet them as only 18.9.2007 is the visitors day. In such circumstances, the petitioner did not have the opportunity to effectively defend or put forth his case before the Advisory Board. Under similar circumstance, this Court in H.C.P.No.865 of 2006 by order dated 13.11.2006 had quashed the order of detention. 4. For the reasons stated above, we are of the considered view that the order of detention is vitiated, as the petitioner was not given sufficient opportunity to put forth his case before the Advisory Board, and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the impugned order of detention dated 13.8.2007 passed by the second respondent is quashed and the habeas corpus petition is allowed. The detenu shall be set at liberty forthwith, unless his presence is required in connection with any other case. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. ss To 1. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Fort St.George Chennai 600 009 2. The Commissioner of Police Salem City Salem District 3. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem. 5. The Joint Secretary, Public [Law and order] Fort St. George, Chennai 9. + 1 CC To Mr.R.Subadra Devi, Advocate SR NO.14776 H.C.P.No.1411 of 2007 mdr[co] gp/31.3. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/