GOMATHI Vs. THE STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Habeas Corpus Petition is filed, by the wife of the detenu, namely, Balaji, Son of Sanniyasi Rao, aged 36 years, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records, in BDFGISSV No. 1305/2014 dated 19.09.2014, passed by the 2nd Respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 3(1) of the 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" in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, and quash the same and to direct the Respondents to produce the body of the detenu and set him at liberty forthwith.

(2.) EVEN though, Mr.S.A.Rajan, the learned counsel for the petitioner raised many grounds, in assailing the impugned order of detention, he confined his arguments only on the ground that there is unexplained delay in considering and disposing of the representation of the detenu, which would vitiate the impugned detention order.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the representation, dated Nil, has been received by the Government on 21.10.2014 and remarks were called for on 24.10.2014. But, the remarks were received only on 08.12.2014, after a delay of 44 days. The learned counsel further submitted that though the file was dealt with by the Under Secretary and the Deputy Secretary on 10.10.2014, the Minster has dealt with the said file of the detenu only on 18.12.2014 and the same was rejection on the same day, with a further delay of 7 days. It is his further submission that as per the Proforma submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, there were 17 intervening holidays and even after giving concession as to the intervening holidays, still there is a delay of 34 days in considering the representation, which remains unexplained. The unexplained delay in considering the representation of the detenu vitiates the detention order. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajammal Vs State of Tamil Nadu, reported in : (1999) 1 SCC 417.