MAHALAKSHMI Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, wife of the detenu herein, has filed this Petition challenging the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent in C.No.74/G/IS/2017 dated 19.12.2017, branding him as a "Drug Offender" as contemplated u/s.2[e] of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 [Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982].

(2.) As per the grounds of detention dated 19.12.2017, passed by the second respondent, the detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases:

(3.) Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner raised many grounds in assailing the impugned order of detention in the petition, he confined his arguments only to the ground of delay in considering the representation of the detenu, dated 26.12.2017 According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the representation, dated 26.12.2017, has been received by the Government on 25.01.2018 ; the remarks were called on the same day, i.e., 25.01.2018. But the said remarks were received only on 06.02.2018, after a delay of 12 days. He adds that though the file was submitted to the Under Secretary on 07.02.2018, the Minister has dealt with the said file of the detenu only on 09.03.2018, with a further delay of 30 days and the rejection letter was prepared on 12.03.2018 and sent to the detenu on the next day, i.e., on 13.03.2018. It is his further submission that as per the Proforma submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, there were 13 intervening holidays and even after giving concession as to the intervening holidays, still there is a delay of 29 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, 1999 1 SCC 417.