B. Sampath vs The State of Tamil Nadu

V. Dhanapalan, J.—The petitioner by name Sampath, who is detained as a ''''Goonda"" 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 05.04.2006, challenges the same in this Petition.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

At the foremost, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is enormous delay in disposal of the representation of the detenu, which

vitiates the ultimate order of detention. With reference to the above claim, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has placed the details, which show

that the representation of the detenu dated 0 8.04.2006 was received by the Government on 10.04.2006 and remarks were called for on

11.04.2006 and the remarks were received by the Government on 02.05.2006 and the File was also submitted on 10.05.2006 and the same was

dealt with by the Under Secretary on 11.05.2006 and by the Deputy Secretary on 22.05.2006 and finally, the Minister for Prohibition and Excise

passed orders on 23.05.2006. The rejection letter was prepared on 24.05.2006 and the same was sent to the detenu on 26.05.2006 and served

to him on 29.05.2006. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, though the under Secretary dealt with the matter on

11.05.2006, there is no explanation at all by the Deputy Secretary for taking time till 22.05.2006 to decide the matter. 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 dealing with the matter

by the Deputy Secretary 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 the custody unless he is required in some other case or cause.