RAMYA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus as stated therein. The petitioner challenges the order of detention dated 7.2.2009 made in C.M.P.No,3/2009 passed by the second respondent in exercise of powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 read with the order issued by the Government in G.O.(D) No.12, Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department dated 18.1.2009 under Section 3(2), detaining her husband Ayyasamy in Central Prison, Madurai.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, while challenging the detention order, submitted that there is an unexplained delay in deciding the petitioner's representation dated 17.2.2009 preferred before the second respondent. In reply, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor referred to the counter affidavit and submitted that the representation dated 17.2.2009 was sent to the Government along with the remarks on 28.2.2009 and the decision was intimated to the petitioner on 2.3.2009. Thus, we find there is no delay in deciding the representation of the detenu.

(3.) WHEN similar matter fell for consideration before a Full Bench of this court in K. Thirupathi v. District Magistrate and District Collector [2005-2-LW (Crl.) 946], the Court observed as under: