K. PETCHIAMMAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The detenue namely, Kottaisamy @ Kottorsamy, son of Karupaiah, aged 42 years, has been detained by the order of the second respondent, dated 2.7.2020 in M.H.S.Confdl No.04/2020, wherein, he has been branded as ''Goonda'', as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

(2.) The Petitioner is the wife of the detenu. Mr.N.Pragalathan, the learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the detention Order impugned in this Habeas Corpus Petition is liable to be set aside on two grounds. Firstly, on the ground of violation of procedural safeguards guaranteed under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India . Secondly, on the ground of failure on the part of the Detaining Authority to intimate the order of Detention to his family members or to his relatives.

(3.) Per contra, Mr.K.Dinesh Babu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would argue that the second respondent/Detaining Authority having satisfied with the cogent and relevant materials furnished by the sponsoring authority, has rightly passed the Detention Order against the detenu, after taking note of his antecedents and only to prevent him from doing similar acts in future. It is contended by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the order of detention has been properly intimated and there is no delay in considering the representation of the detenu and prayed for dismissal of the Habeas Corpus Petition.