Judgment V. Dhanapalan, J. 1. The petitioner is the husband of detenu. The detenu has been branded as a Drug Offender as contemplated under Section 2(e) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and detained under order of the 2nd respondent passed in BDFGISSV No. 970 of 2013 dated 11.09.2013. 2. The detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases:– S. No. Police Station and Crime No. Sections of Law 1. R-3, Ashok Nagar Police Station, Crime No. 943 of 2013 Sections 8(c) r/w 20 (b)(ii) (B) of NDPS Act 2. R-3, Ashok Nagar Police Station, Crime No. 1342 of 2013 Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii) (B) of NDPS Act The ground case alleged against the detenu is one registered on 22.08.2013 by the Inspector of Police, R-3, Ashok Nagar Police Station in Crime No. 1749 of 2013 for offences under Sections 8 (c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. Aggrieved by the order of detention, the present petition has been filed. 3. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the order of detention, he has mainly focussed his argument on the ground that there is a delay in disposal of the representation dated 23.09.2013, which is violative of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and therefore, on this sole ground alone, the detention order is liable to be quashed. 4. We have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above submission. 5. On a careful scrutiny of the impugned order, it is seen that the detaining authority has passed the order of detention on 11.09.2013 and on receipt of a copy of detention order, the detenu made a representation dated 23.09.2013 to the authorities concerned, which was received on 24.09.2013, for which the remarks called on 26.09.2013 were received on 07.10.2013. On submission of the file on 09.10.2013, it was dealt with by both the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary on 10.10.213 and thereafter, the file was submitted to the Minister on 12.10.2013. Finally the representation of the detenu was decided to be rejected vide letter dated 17.10.2013. 6. On submission of the file on 09.10.2013, it was dealt with by both the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary on 10.10.213 and thereafter, the file was submitted to the Minister on 12.10.2013. Finally the representation of the detenu was decided to be rejected vide letter dated 17.10.2013. 6. In this whole process, there occurred a delay of 6 days, namely, between 26.09.2013 and 07.10.2013 (excluding holidays falling on 28th, 29th of November, 2013 and 2nd, 5th and 6th of October, 2013), which would definitely cause great prejudice to the detenu and amount to an infringement of right ensured under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the impugned detention order cannot be sustained and is vitiated. 7. Accordingly, the impugned detention order passed by the 2nd respondent, detaining the detenue Hema, W/o Selvaraj, made in BDFGISSV No. 970 of 2013 dated 11.09.2013 is quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The above named detenu, who is detained at the Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai, is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, unless her custody is required in connection with any other case.