LAWS(MAD)-2010-4-280

D SENTHIL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Decided On April 01, 2010
D.SENTHIL Appellant
V/S
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that yet another petition in H.C.P. No.327 of 2010 is also pending before the Court. The detenus in both the petitions are co-accused in Crime No.1273 of 2009. Under the circumstances, H.C.P. No.327 of 2010 can be taken up along with H.C.P. No.2380 of 2009, for which, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has no objection. Hence, H.C.P. No.327 of 2010 is also called and taken up along with H.C.P. No.2380 of 2009 and following common order is passed:- Challenge is made to the order dated 11.9.2009 in proceedings No.60/BDFGISSV/2009 and order dated 22.9.2009 in proceeding No.63/BDFGISSV/ 2009 respectively passed by the second respondent, whereby the detenus viz. Thiru Alagar @ Tamilalagar @ Pannikutti Alagar and Thiru. John, who are petitioner's friends, were ordered to be detained under the Act 14 of 1982, branding them as "Goondas".

(2.) This Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also looked into the materials available on record, in particular, the order under challenge.

(3.) It is not in controversy that pursuant to the recommendation made by the sponsoring Authority that the detenus are involved in two adverse cases viz. (i) Madurai Railway police station Crime No.528 of 2009 for the offences under Sections 147, 341, 352, 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code (ii) Madurai Railway police Crime No.529 of 2009 for the offences under Sections 147, 341, 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 2 and 3 of the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 and also a ground case in Crime No.1273 of 2009 registered by C3 S.S. Colony police station for the offences under Sections 392 read with 397, 506(ii) of the Indian Penal code and on scrutiny of materials, the detaining Authority has arrived at the subjective satisfaction that the activities of the detenus were prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and passed the detention order, after terming the detenus as "Goondas".