ARULMOZHI Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition challenges an order of detention made by the second respondent dated 3.5.2010, whereby the husband of the petitioner by name Kamaraj was ordered to be detained under the provisions of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act 1980, after recording that his activities were prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community.

(2.) The Court looked into all the materials available and in particular, the order under challenge, along with the grounds of detention and heard the learned Counsel fort he petitioner.

(3.) It is not in controversy that pursuant to the recommendations made by the sponsoring authority that the detenu is involved in three adverse cases namely (1) Salem Civil Supplies Criminal Investigation Department Crime No.89/2009 under Sec.6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 read with 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act 1955; (2) Salem Civil Supplies Criminal Investigation Department Crime No.443/2009 under Sec.6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 read with 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act 1955 and (3) Salem City Annathanapatti Police Station Crime No.255/2010 under Sec.6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 read with 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act 1955, and also in a ground case registered by Salem Civil Supplies Criminal Investigation Department in Crime No.268/2010 under Sec.6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 read with 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act 1955 for an occurrence that took place on 21.4.2010 when he was found in possession of 40 bags of PDS rice each containing 50 Kg., the detaining authority after scrutiny of the entire materials and recording the subjective satisfaction that the activities of the detenu were prejudicial to the supplies of commodities essential to the community, has made the order under challenge.