SETHUPATHI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This habeas corpus petition has been filed by the father of the detenu, namely, Arunkumar, son of Sethupathy, aged about 19 years, challenging the detention order in No.86/B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V/2019, dated 21.11.2019, passed by the second respondent, branding him as "Goonda" as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

(2.) Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian, learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed on the sole ground of arbitrariness exercised by the Authority concerned in clamping the detention order only as against two accused, while the criminal case has been registered totally as against five accused. In support of the said contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner, placed reliance on the decision of this Court reported in 2010 (1) MWN (Cr.) 129 ( Chandra v. The Secretary to Government ) and the order passed by this Court in H.C.P.(MD).No.613 of 2019, dated 02.01.2020. The learned counsel would further submit that there is a delay in considering the representation submitted by the detenu.

(3.) Per contra, Mr.V.Neelakandan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that the detention order has been passed by the second respondent after arriving at the subjective satisfaction based on the cogent and relevant materials placed by the Sponsoring Authority and to prevent the detenu from indulging in similar activities in future. It is further contended that there is no illegality or irregularity in the order of detention passed by the second respondent. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.