PANDEESWARI Vs. SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the wife of the detenu, by name, Siva @ Sivakumar, aged about 37 years, who has been detained under the provisions of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (Act 7 of 1980), on the orders of the second respondent in Detention Order No. 2, dated 27.7.2012. Now, he has been lodged at Madurai Central Prison. After the Detention Order was passed, the detenu made a representation to the Government on 30.7.2012 and the same was received by the Government on 1.8.2012 upon which remarks were called for from the Detaining Authority on 2.8.2012 and the remarks were received by the Government only on 23.8.2012. In this aspect, there was a delay of twenty one days, out of which, 8 days were holidays. Even if allowance is given for those eight days, which were holidays, still there was a delay of thirteen days. Seeking to quash the said Detention Order and to set the detenu at liberty, the petitioner has come up with this habeas corpus petition.

(2.) Even though several grounds were raised in the habeas corpus petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner would mainly focus his argument on the ground of delay between 2.8.2012 and 23.8.2012 in considering the representation of the detenu. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there was a delay of thirteen days, as detailed above and the same remains unexplained. According to the learned counsel, the said unexplained delay has caused serious prejudice to the detenu, and therefore, the Detention Order is liable to be quashed.

(3.) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced a proforma detailing the dates and events. In the said proforma, it has been admitted that the representation of the detenu was received on 1.8.2012 remarks were called for from the Detaining Authority on 2.8.2012 and the remarks were received by the Government only on 23.8.2012