LAWS(MAD)-2017-1-180

M.KALAISELVI Vs. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HOME EXCISE AND PROHIBITION ,SECRETARIAT FORT ST.GEORGE,CHENNAI

Decided On January 24, 2017
M.Kalaiselvi Appellant
V/S
The Principal Secretary To Government Department Of Home Excise And Prohibition ,Secretariat Fort St.George,Chennai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the wife of the detenu, by name Mr.Mariappan @ Kaduvetti, aged about 32 years. The detenu has been detained, as per the order of the second respondent, dated 22.03.2016, under Sec. 2(f) of the Tamilnadu Act 14 of 1982, branding him as "Goonda". Challenging the same, the petitioner has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records carefully.

(3.) The main submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Government cannot direct or extend the period of detention upto the period of 12 months in one single stroke and the same would be violative of Art. 22(4)(a) of the Constitution of India. Relying on the provision of Sec. 3(2) 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 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the said proviso mandates the State Government to pass an order of detention at any one time not exceeding three months and hence, the detention order would be valid only for a period not exceeding three months and thereafter, it must be extended periodically, but, in the present case, the State Government, without making such periodical extension, at a single stroke has passed the order of detention upto 12 months and therefore, the detention order is liable to be quashed. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Cherukuri Mani Vs. the Chief Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh and others, reported in (2016) 2 SCC (Cri) 345, wherein the Honourable Supreme Court in paragraph No.12 has held as follows;