VEDIYAMMAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed challenging the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent dated 16.01.2018 in his office reference No.S.C.No.01/2018 against the petitioner's husband Thiru.Babu, S/o.Pachiyappan. One adverse case was registered against the detenue on 11.01.2018 in PS Crime No.16/2018 under Section 294(b), 353 and 506(ii) of Indian Penal Code. The said adverse case also in relation to the "sand smuggling" in a tipper mini lorry. The ground case also has been registered on the same day on 11.01.2018 by the Inspector of Police, Krishnagiri Thaluk Circle. The ground case also in connection with the "sand smuggling" in mini tipper lorry. The detaining authority came to the conclusion that the detenue is in the habit of indulging in such activities of "sand smuggling ", which is prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order and public health. In other words, the detenue has been declared as a habitual sand offender and therefore, the detaining authority had taken a decision to inflict the provisions of Act 14 on the detenue.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf the petitioner contended that there is an enormous delay in considering the representation submitted on behalf of the detenue, which is in violation of the fundamental rights enshrined to the detenue under the Constitution of India. In this regard, the learned Government Advocate submitted a memo forwarded by the Under Secretary to the Government in respect of the factual details. On a perusal of the said memo, it is found that the representation submitted on behalf of the detenue on 29.01.2018 was received on 002018. The remarks were called for on 002018 itself. However, the remarks on the files were received only on 202018, after a lapse of about 20 days. The said remarks were scrutinized and the files had been submitted to the Under the Secretary for perusal on 202018 and the Deputy Secretary also dealt with the file on the same day on 202018. However, the Hon'ble Minister approved the order of detention only on 09.03.2018. Thus, there is a long delay of about 15 days in considering the representation. In this regard, the learned Government Advocate brought to the notice of this Court that 24.02018, 25.02018, 03.03.2018 and 04.03.2018 are holidays. Inspite of that we are of the opinion that there is a considerable delay in dealing with the representation submitted on behalf of the detenue. The delay caused certainly affects the right of the detenue. In view of the fact that personal liberty is a fundamental right enshrined under the Constitution of India. Once the person is detained under the prevention law, there cannot be any delay in dealing with the representation, and such a delay affects the fundamental rights of the person. The Apex Court of India repeatedly emphasised that the person who was detained under prevention law, if submitted a representation, the same has to be considered and based on the grounds raised, the competent authority is bound to pass an order on merits and in accordance with law, such decision, the delay caused by the authorities will pave way to the detenue to get an order of release from this Court by way of a Habeas Corpus Petition.

(3.) When this HCP was taken up for hearing by this Court, we have raised a concern that large scale sand smugglings are going on, in our State. People while travelling the National Highway and other State Highway roads are frequently facing troubles from and out of these sand smugglers and their illegal activities. These mini tipper lorry which all are plying in the National Highway and other State highways are causing danger to the public, who are travelling on the road. These persons, who are committing such grave illegality or causing threat to the society and to the public order. People are frequently witnessing such sand smuggling throughout the day and night. We are unable to understand how these sand smugglings are openly happening in the national highway and other state highway, when the jurisdictional police are patrolling the areas frequently. All these sand smugglings are mostly happening with the knowledge of these patrolling vehicle and the jurisdictional police. We raised the question and requested the learned Government Advocate to clarify how many such cases are booked against the public officials, who are all not taking any action against such sand smuggling across the State. The Government Advocate today produced the particulars as per the instruction obtained from the Director of Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai 16. The number of regular cases (trap) registered during the last 10 years are provided.