The delay in rejecting the representation of a man detained under the Goondas Act by the Minister (in charge of the Home Department, a portfolio which is held by the Chief Minister), who did not clear the file for over a month, has resulted in the Madras High Court ordering the release of the detenu.
The court held that it was not offered a “justifiable reason” for the “long period of silence.”
The accused, Mohankumar alias Kumar of Tirupur, had submitted a representation against the order of detention under the Goondas Act served on him on November 12, 2016.
His representation was rejected after a lapse of more than six weeks. Following this, his mother filed a habeas corpus petition in the High Court, seeking a direction to set him at liberty. When the court ascertained reasons for the delay, it was informed that the plea was received on December 2, 2016, and a file relating to it was forwarded to the Minister on December 15 the same year.
However, it was examined by the Minister only on January 19 the following year and was rejected the day after.
Even as the Division Bench of Justices Nooty Ramamohana Rao and S.M. Subramaniam acknowledged “certain extraordinary events” in December 2016 (death of former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa), they questioned the delay on the part of the Minister for over a month. “The State Administration was also concerned with maintaining the law and order situation in the State as a whole in general and particularly in the State capital. But, that is no reason for the Honourable Minister, to whom the file was forwarded on December 15, 2016, not to attend to the said file till January 19, 2017 i.e., for a period of more than a month. No justifiable reason is offered for this long period of silence,” the judges observed.
What SC ruling says
Citing the Supreme Court judgment in Rajammal vs. the State of Tamil Nadu case, the judges said any delay in dealing with the representation would transform into rendering the very right of submission of representation, conferred under Article 22(5) against detention, meaningless and nugatory.
“Hence, we are of the opinion that the delay in between December 15, 2016 and January 19, 2017, notwithstanding the unexpected calamity that befell on the State and its citizens at about that time, has vitiated the further continuance of the detention. We are, therefore, of the further opinion that this writ petition deserves to be allowed by declaring the further detention of the detenu as wholly unsustainable,” the court said and set the accused at liberty.
