@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
A. Selvam, J.@mdashThis Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to call for records relating to detention order dated 23.06.2014 passed in P.D. No.15/2014 by the detaining authority, who has been arrayed as second respondent herein against the detenu by name Balamurugan and quash the same and thereby set him at liberty.
2. The Inspector of Police, Marthandam Police Station as sponsoring authority has submitted an affidavit to the detaining authority, wherein it is stated that the detenu has involved in the following adverse cases:
(i) Crime No. 327 of 2012 on the file of Kadayam Police Station registered under Sections 294(b), 506(ii) and 353 of the Indian Penal Code.
(ii) Crime No. 373 of 2012 on the file of Kadayam Police Station registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code @ Sections 457 and 392 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) Crime No. 273 of 2012 on the file of Alwarkurichy Police Station registered under Sections 294(b), 387 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) Crime No. 92 of 2014 on the file of Kadayam Police Station registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) Crime No. 289 of 2014 on the file of Marthandam Police Station registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code @ Sections 302 and 392 read with 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Further it is stated in the affidavit that on 16.05.2014, one Jobin, Son of Lucas, Ottrivilai, Thickurichy has given a complaint against the detenu and the same has been registered in Crime No. 325 of 2014 under Sections 392 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code on the file of Marthandam Police Station and ultimately requested the detaining authority to invoke Act 14 of 1982 against the detenu.
4. The detaining authority viz., the second respondent herein after perusing the averments made in the affidavit coupled with other connected documents has derived subjective satisfaction to the effect that the detenu is a professional offender and ultimately invoked Act 14 of 1982 against him and thereby branded him as ''Goonda'' by way of passing the impugned detention order and in order to quash the same, the present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the detenu himself as petitioner.
5. On the side of the respondents a detailed counter has been filed, wherein it has been contended inter alia to the effect that all the averments made in the petition are false and ultimately prayed to dismiss the same.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that on the side of the petitioner/detenu two representations have been given and the same have not been considered without delay and therefore the detention order in question is liable to be quashed.
7. On the side of the respondents, a proforma has been submitted, wherein it has been clearly stated that with regard to first representation in between Column Nos. 7 and 9, three clear working days are available and in between Column Nos. 12 and 13, two clear working days are available and with regard to second representation in between Column Nos. 7 and 9, nine clear working days are available and in between Column Nos. 12 and 13, four clear working days are available and no explanation has been given on the side of the respondents with regard to such huge delay and that itself would affect the rights of the petitioner/detenu guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and therefore the detention order in question is liable to be quashed.
8. In fine, this Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the detention order dated 23.06.2014 passed in P.D. No.15/2014 by the second respondent/detaining authority is quashed and consequently the respondents are directed to set the detenu viz., Balamurugan, Son of Madasamy at liberty forthwith, unless he is required to be incarcerated in connection with any other case.
