Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, G. Annakili, wife of the detenu Gunasekaran, filed a habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court challenging the detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, in proceedings No.1170/BCDFGISSSV/2024 dated 27.11.2024. The detenu was classified as a Drug Offender and confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. The petitioner contended that there was an inordinate delay in passing the detention order, as the detenu was arrested on 12.10.2024 but the detention order was passed only on 27.11.2024, a gap of 46 days. The court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. C. Raja, and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. R. Muniyapparaj. The court noted that the delay was not disputed by the respondents. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Sushanta Kumar Banik v. State of Tripura (2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813), the court observed that if there is unreasonable delay between the date of proposal and passing of the detention order, such delay, unless satisfactorily explained, throws doubt on the genuineness of the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority and snaps the live and proximate link between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention. The court found that the delay of 46 days was unexplained and thus the detention order was bad and invalid. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, quashed the detention order, and directed the respondents to set the detenu at liberty forthwith.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Delay in Passing Detention Order - Live and Proximate Link - The detenu was arrested on 12.10.2024 and the detention order was passed on 27.11.2024, a delay of 46 days. The court held that such unexplained delay snaps the live and proximate link between the grounds of detention and the purpose of detention, rendering the detention order invalid. Relying on Sushanta Kumar Banik v. State of Tripura, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813, the court quashed the detention order. (Paras 3-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the inordinate delay of 46 days between the arrest of the detenu on 12.10.2024 and the passing of the detention order on 27.11.2024 vitiates the detention order for snapping the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of detention.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, quashed the detention order No.1170/BCDFGISSSV/2024 dated 27.11.2024, and directed the respondents to set the detenu Gunasekaran at liberty forthwith.
Law Points
- Inordinate delay in passing detention order after arrest snaps live and proximate link
- rendering detention order invalid
- Preventive detention law requires subjective satisfaction to be genuine and proximate
