Manjula v. The State of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated:- 16.10.2006Coram:-The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAMandThe Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.TAMILVANANHabeas Corpus Petition No.822 of 2006 Manjula ... PetitionerVs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

The District Magistrate and District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram... RespondentsPetition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for theissuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in connectionwith the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated06.08.2006 in BDFGISSV No.45/2006 against the petitioner's husbandKrishnan, male, aged 29, son of Ellapillai, who is confined at CentralPrison, Vellore, set aside the same and direct the respondents to producehim before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner: Mr.O.S.Tilak Pasumpadiyar for Mr.J.GaneshFor Respondents: Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran Addl. Public ProsecutorO R D E R (Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM,J.)The petitioner, who is the wife of the detenu, by name Krishnan, whois detained as a "Bootlegger" as contemplated under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, DrugOffenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, SlumGrabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), by theimpugned detention order dated 06.08.2006, challenges the same in this Petition. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learnedAdditional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

At the foremost, learned counsel for the petitioner, aftertaking us through the averments in para 5(i) of the grounds of detention, has submitted that the ultimate detention order has to be interfered withon the ground of non application of mind on the part of the detainingauthority. While elaborating the above submission, the learned counselappearing for the petitioner has brought to our notice that though thedetaining authority has noted that the detenu viz., Krishnan has filed abail application before the Court of Principal District and SessionsJudge, Chengalpattu, in Crl.M.P.No.8466/2006 and the same was withdrawnby the accused on 24.07.2006 and again he filed a bail application beforethe High Court, Chennai in Crl.O.P.No.19577/2006 and the same was postedfor hearing on 07.08.2006 and the same is pending, he has arrived at aconclusion mechanically that "... however it is most likely that he maycome out on bail by filing a bail application before the same or higherCourt ...". As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for thepetitioner, the detaining authority, having found that the bailapplication filed by the detenu is pending before the High Court, Chennaiin Crl.O.P.No.19577 of 2006, has arrived at a conclusion that it would bepossible for the detenu to come out on bail by filing bail applicationbefore the concerned Court or higher Courts, which amply shows his nonapplication of mind in arriving imminent possibility of the detenu beingcoming out on bail. It is not in dispute that when the bail applicationfiled earlier is still pending, unless the said petition is dismissed, thedetenu cannot move another bail application. We are satisfied that theconclusion arrived at by the detaining authority cannot be sustained andthe detention order is liable to be quashed on the ground of nonapplication of mind and accordingly, the same is quashed.

Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and theimpugned order of detention is set aside. The detenu is directed to beset at liberty forthwith from the custody unless he is required in someother case or cause. Sd/Asst. Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ raaTo 1. The District Magistrate and District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram. 2. The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore. (In duplicate for communication to detenu)4. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order)Fort St. George, Chennai-9.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.1 cc To Mr.J.Ganesh, Advocate, SR.48158. HCP. No.822 of 2006TEJ(CO)RVL 31.10.2006