Ayyanar vs The State of Tamil Nadu

P. Sathasivam, J.—The petitioner is the father-in-law of the detenu by name Rajamani, who was detained as ''Bootlegger'' as contemplated

under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders,

Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), by the impugned detention order dated 16.08.2005, challenges the

same in this Petition.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

At the foremost, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is unexplained delay in the disposal of the representation of the detenu,

which vitiates the ultimate order of detention. With regard to the above contention, learned Government Advocate has placed certain details, which

show that the representation of the detenu dated 04.10.2005 was received by the Government on 05.10.2005 and reminder was sent on

06.10.2006 and remarks were received by the Government on 17.10.2005. Thereafter, the file was submitted on 20.10.2005 and the same was

dealt with by the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary on the same date i.e. on 20.10.2005 and finally, the Minister for Prohibition and Excise

passed orders on 21.10.2005. The rejection letter was prepared on 28.10.2005 and the same was sent to the detenu on 31.10.2005. As rightly

pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, though the Minister for Prohibition and Excise passed an order on 21.10.2005, there is no

explanation at all for taking time for preparation of rejection letter till 28.10.2005. In the absence of any explanation by the person concerned even

after excluding the intervening holidays, we are of the view that the time taken for preparation of rejection letter is on the higher side and we hold

that the said delay has prejudiced the detenu in disposal of his representation. On this ground, we quash the impugned order of detention.

Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned order of detention is set aside. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty

forthwith from custody unless he is required in some other case or cause.