Muthukumar v. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government

ORDER [Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.] The petitioner is the detenu viz., Muthukumar, S/o.Arumugam, aged about 23 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by order in B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V.No.84/2022 dated 25.11.2022 holding him to be a 'Goonda', as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

¶2We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

¶3Though several grounds have been raised in the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would mainly focus his argument on the ground that the detaining authority has relied upon the order passsed in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8979/2022 dated 11.05.2022 and came to the conclusion that in a similar case bail has been granted and that there is likelihood of the detenu released on bail. The learned counsel submitted that the detaining authority was aware of the fact that the detenu filed bail application in the ground case and the same is pending. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order relied upon by the detaining authority is not similar and there is non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority.

¶4The learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed this petition by filing counter.

¶5On carefully going through the detention order, it is seen that in the order that was relied upon by the detaining authority in Crl.O.P.(MD)No. 8979/2022 dated 11.05.2022, the accused therein was enlarged on bail since he had no bad antecedents. However, in the present case, the detenu has one previous case. Hence, the order that was relied upon by the detaining authority cannot be considered to be an order passed in a similar case.

¶6In view of the above, the detention order suffers from non application of mind and the same is liable to be interfered with by this Court.

¶7In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V.No.84/2022 dated 25.11.2022 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, viz., Muthukumar, S/o.Arumugam, aged about 23 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case. (M.S.R., J.) (M.N.K., J.)

21.07.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order mbi To

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Madurai District, Madurai.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5.The Joint Secretary, Public (Law and Order) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai. H.C.P(MD)No.323oofo2023 M.S.RAMESH,oJ. and M.NIRMALoKUMAR,oJ. mbi H.C.P(MD)No.323oofo2023

21.07.2023 Pageg6gofg6

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.07.2023 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Muthukumar .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate, Madurai District, Madurai. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Madurai. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned detention order passed by the second respondent in proceedings in B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V.No.84/2022 dated 25.11.2022 in detaining the detenu under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as 'Goonda' and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu, namely, Muthukumar, S/o.Arumugam, male, aged about 23 years, who is detained in Central Prison, Madurai, before this Court and set him at liberty. For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor