MALATHI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the wife of the detenu, namely, Asir Nesarajan @ Asir Nesaraj @ Rajan, aged 35, branded as 'Goonda' in detention order in P.D. No. 02/2014, dated 24.03.2014 by the District Collector and District Magistrate, Kanyakumar District at Nagercoil, has sought for a writ of Habeas Corpus Petition.

(2.) THE Detenu has come to the adverse notice of the police in ten cases. The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th and 9th adverse cases are registered in Cr. Nos. 17/2009, 244/2010, 293 and 526/2011, 502/2013 and 48/2014, on the file of Colachel Police Station under Sections, 307 IPC @ 307 r/w 34 IPC; 448, 294(b), 506(ii) IPC and 3(1) of TNPP P (D & L) Act; 294(b), 324, 506(ii) IPC @ 294(b), 326 and 506(ii) IPC; 392 IPC; 341, 294(b), 307 and 506(i) IPC; and 341, 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC respectively. The 3rd, 5th and 7th adverse cases are registered in Cr. Nos. 861, 2769 and 2842 of 2011, on the file of Vadasery Police Station, under Sections 392 IPC; 379 IPC and 341, 294(b), 392, 427, 506(ii) IPC respectively. The 10th adverse case was registered in Cr. No. 147/2014 under Section 387 IPC on the file of Karungal Police Station. The adverse cases 1 to 7 are pending trial, the adverse cases 8, 9 and 10 are pending investigation, when the order of detention was passed. The order of detention was passed on the basis of the ground case alleged to have registered on 13.03.2014 on the file of Colachel P.S. Cr. No. 94/2014 under Sections 341, 294(b), 324, 307 IPC and 3(1) of TNPPP (D & L) Act. On being satisfied that the Detenu is habitually indulging in activities, affecting the public Order, the Detaining Authority has clamped the Detention Order on the Detenu. At paragraph 6, the Detaining Authority has concluded as follows:

(3.) ON a perusal of the Proforma produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, we find that the representation dated 02.04.2014 was received by the Government on 07.04.2014. The remarks were called for, by the Detaining Authority, on 08.04.2014 and the remarks were received by the Government on 15.04.2014. In between 08.04.2014 and 15.04.2014, there were 4 clear working days and 3 holidays. Further, the Deputy Secretary dealt with the file on 16.04.2014. But, the Minister for Electricity, Prohibition and Excise, dealt with the same on 24.04.2014. In between 16.04.2014 and 24.04.2014, there were 4 clear working days and 4 holidays. There is delay in considering the representation, during the relevant period, at two stages, which has not been properly explained. At this juncture, this Court deems it fit to consider few decisions on the aspect of delay.