PALANIYAMMAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT,; DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND; INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is the mother of the detenu. The Petitioner has come forward with this Habeas Corpus Petition seeking for the relief of quashing the detention order dated 25.05.2010, slapped on her son branding him as "Drug Offender" as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of dangerous activities of Boot leggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982).

(2.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioner would raise two contentions namely:

(3.) Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned detention order. It is contended that the detaining authority has specifically mentioned in paragraph No. 4 of the grounds of detention that the Petitioner was habitually possessing and selling intoxicated drugs mainly on the ground case. Therefore, it is contended that the detenu has been rightly branded as "drug offender". It is further contended that the detaining authority has also specifically mentioned in Paragraph No. 5 that though the Petitioner has not moved any bail application, he is likely to prefer a bail application and as such there is a real possibility for the detenu to come out on bail and as such it cannot be stated that the detaining authority has passed the detention order casually and mechanically without any subjective satisfaction.