HCP/1360/2007 of MRS.PARAMESWARI Vs THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT on 20 December 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.12.2007

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN ANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.REGUPATHI

Habeas Corpus Petition No.1360 of 2007

Parameswari.. PetitionerVs1. The Secretary to Government Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.2. The Commissioner of Police Chennai City, Chennai-8... Respondents-----Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India for issue of Writ of Habeas Corpus as statedtherein.-----For Petitioner :Mr.R.C.Paul KanagarajFor Respondents:Mr.N.R.ElangoAddl. Public ProsecutorO R D E R(Order of the Court was made by P.D.DINAKARAN,J.)

The second respondent herein clamped an order ofdetention as against the petitioner's son Jagadeesh @Jagadeeswaran, son of Magendran, as the said authorityarrived at the subjective satisfaction that the said detenuis a Goonda and he has to be detained under Section 3(1) ofthe Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities ofBootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Officers, Goondas,Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbersand Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982).

2. Challenging the abovesaid detention, the mother of thedetenu has come forward with the present Habeas Corpus Petitionseeking a writ of habeas corpus to call for the recordspertaining to the detention order passed against the detenu bythe second respondent in Proceedings No.313/BDFGISSV/07, dated12.7.2007, set aside the same and to direct the respondents toproduce the body of the detenu, now detained at Central Prison,Puzhal, Chennai before this Court and set him at liberty.

3.1. According to the detaining authority, viz., the secondrespondent, the ground case is said to have taken place on2.7.2007 at about 8.30 hours. On receipt of reliableinformation, in respect of Crime Nos.164 and 165 of 2007 on thefile of N2 Kasimedu Police Station for the offences punishableunder Sections 392 and 379 IPC, the police personnel surroundedthe detenu at the junction of Jeevarathinam Salai andVinayagapuram Main Road, who threatened them at knife point byuttering filthy words. Further, the detenu picked up sodawater bottles and hurled the same against the police personnel.The bottles fell on the road side broken into pieces and thebroken pieces scattered all over the road side. The public whowere at the spot noticing the atrocious activities ran for saferplaces apprehending danger to their lives. The normal trafficin that area was totally dislocated. By his action, the detenucreated panic. With the help of public, the police personnelarrested the detenu and remanded him to judicial custody. Inthis regard, a case was registered in Crime No.166/2007 for theoffences punishable under Sections 341, 332, 336, 427, 307 and506(ii) IPC.

3.2. The second respondent, taking note of the above caseas a ground case and three adverse cases pending against thedetenu in Crime Nos.143/2006, 164/2007 and 165/2007 on the fileof N2 Kasimedu Police Station for the offences punishable underSections 341, 323, 307, 506(ii) 392 and 379 IPC and havingsatisfied that there is a compelling necessity to detain thedetenu in order to prevent him from indulging in the activitieswhich are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order,ordered his detention dubbing him as a Goonda.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner challenges theimpugned order of detention dated 12.7.2007 on the ground of nonapplication of mind on the part of the detaining authority, asthe detaining authority had not taken note of the fact that thespecific plea raised by the detenu in his representationaddressed to the Government dated 17.7.2007 that the detenu wastaken by the police attached to N2 Kasimedu Police Station on27.6.2007 and not on 2.7.2007, as mentioned in the detention order, was not considered in the rejection order dated 25.9.2007.

5. We have perused the entire materials placed before us.Even though in the grounds of detention, it was stated that thedetenu was arrested on 2.7.2007 with respect to the ground case,in the representation of the detenu dated 17.7.2007, he hadspecifically stated that he was taken on 27.6.2007 by the Policeand was kept under their custody till 2.7.2007 and thereafter, afalse case was foisted against him. However, the firstrespondent, while passing the order of rejection dated 25.9.2007rejecting the representation of the detenu dated 17.7.2007, hadnot considered the contention raised by the detenu as to thearrest of the detenu.

6. We are, therefore, satisfied that the detainingauthority had not taken note of the above fact, which shows thenon application of mind on the part of the detaining authority.Accordingly, the order of detention dated 12.7.2007 is vitiatedand the same is set aside. The detenu Jagadeesh @Jagadeeswaran is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unlesshis presence is required in connection with any other case.

ATRSd/Asst. Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.Registrar To