M GOVINDA GOUNDER Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the four writ petitions are for the issue of a writs of Habeas Corpus to produce the detenus in each of the cases before this Court and set aside the orders of detention passed against each of the detenus and set them at liberty. W.P. No.5538 of 1990 has been filed by the father of the detenu one Sevalayan alias Subbarayan. W.P. No.5539 of 1990 has been filed by the wife of the detenu Sundaramoorthy. W.P. No. 5647 of 1990 has been filed by the father-in-law of the detenu Pakkiri. W.P. No.5648 of 1990 has been filed by the brother-in-law of the detenu Veerappan. The detention orders in all the cases are dated 15-3-1990 and relate to the same incident. All the detenus have been detained as bootleggers under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. W.P. Nos.5647 and 5648 of 1990 have been argued by Sri. N. T. Vanamamalai, learned senior counsel and W.P. Nos.5538 and 5539 of 1990 have been argued by Sri. R. Subramaniam.

(2.) We will first narrate the facts leading to the detention orders as set out in the order of detention itself. The detenu in W.P. No.5539 of 1990 Sundaramoorthy is said to be a municipal councillor of Panrutti Municipality. His sister is one Mala alias Nirmala. Sevalayan, detenu in W.P.No.5538 of 1990 is the husband of the said Mala. The detenu Sundaramoorthy who was originally a licensee to sell toddy in retail had to stop his business because of the introduction of prohibition in Tamil Nadu. It is stated that the said Sundaramoorthy entered into a conspiracy with the other detenus in buying, possessing and selling illicit arrack in a clandestine manner. They are said to have procured illicit arrack from Pondicherry, transported the same to Panrutti and stored the contraband in a deep pit dug up for that purpose and concealed the same by placing sticks and shrubs on the top of the pit, near the house of the said Mala. Sevalayan alias Subbarayan, detenu in W. P. No.5538 of 1990 and certain others are said to have procured the illicit liquor from the arrack shop No. 1, Karayamputhur in Pondicherry State. The said arrack shop is said to have been run by Pakkiri, the petitioner in W.P. No.5647 of 1990. Veerappan, the detenu in W.P. No.5648 of 1990 is the brother of the said Pakkiri. Not content with the sale of arrack supplied by the Government of Pondicherry and with a view to amass wealth, Pakkiri and Veerappan detenus in W.P. Nos. 5647 and 5648 of 1990 procured rectified spirit in a clandestine manner. They had sold and delivered the contraband in a clandestine manner to Sundaramoorthy, detenu in W. P. No.5539 of 1990. Sunndaramoorthy and Sevalayan, detenus in W.P. Nos.5539 and 5538 of 1990 along with others purchased the illicit liquor from Pakkiri and others, transported the same by bicycles to Panrutti, kept the contraband in their possession and sold the same to innocent public in Thattanchavadi, Panruti. On 10-2-1990, 13-2-1990 and 17-2-1990, Sundaramoorthy is said to have procured 16 cans each containing 30 litres of spurious liquor containing methyl alcohol poison as one of its ingredients from Pakkiri and others in Karayamputhur. The contraband was kept in the usual place near Mala's house. It is stated that on 18-2-1990 Sundaramoorthy and Sevalayan, detenus in W.P. Nos.5538 and 5539 of 1990 sold the illicit liquor on the western side of Kokkupalayam road. The consumption of the said liquor resulted in the death of as many as 36 persons and the incident was given wide publicity in the Newspapers and it was called "killer brew" tragedy. On 19-2-1990 at about 03.00 hours, the Sub-Inspector of Police (Law and Order), Panruti Police Station rushed to the house of one Ramasamy, the first victim in the case and recorded a statement from his wife Rani. She also disclosed the fact of several others were in serious condition. The case was registered on 19-2-1990 at about 04.00 hours as Crime No. 136 of 1990 u/S.4(1-A) read with 4(1)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. On the same day, Mala alias Nirmala and one Murugan were arrested at Kalathumettu Eri, Pudu Nagar, Panruti. They were interrogated and statements were recorded from them. In pursuance of their confession statements, six empty plastic cans with some remnants of spurious liquor were seized under a cover of a mahazar in the presence of independent witnesses. The sample was sent to the Regional Forensic Laboratory, Thanjavur. Similarly, one Kaliaperumal was arrested on 20-2-1990 at Karayamputhur at the arrack shop No. 1 already referred to and his statement was duly recorded. Five more cans, plastic bags, incriminating diary and records were seized from Kaliyaperumal and the samples of illicit liquor were sent for analysis. One Mani was arrested at Karayamputhur and on his statement 74 cans were seized and 74 samples were taken in independent bottles and sent for analysis. Veerappan, detenu in W.P. No.5648 of 1990 and one Narayanan were arrested at 11-00 a.m. on 20/02/1990. 13 iron barrels each containing 200 litres of illicit liquor along with 10 cans containing 90 litres of illicit liquors were recovered from them. On 21-2-1990 at about 02.30 hours Sundaramoorthy, detenu in W.P. No.5539 of 1990 was arrested at Gorimedu, at Pondicherry. On his information, 7 cans each containing 30 litres of illicit liquors were seized. On 28-2-1990 at about 23.00 hours, Sevalayan alias Subbarayan detenu in W.P. No.5538 of 1990 was arrested at Muthiraipalayam at Pondicherry State. A statement was recorded from Sevalayan alias Sabbarayan also. On 6-3-1990 at about 22.00 hours Pakkiri, detenu in W.P.No. 5647 of 1990 was arrested at Chittoor. In pursuance of his statement, incriminating documents were seized from the said Pakkiri. The chemical examination reports disclosed the presence of methyl alcohol poison in all the samples taken from the said persons or recovered on their information. The Assistant Medical Officer has opined that the rectified spirit contains 90% to 95% of Ethyl alcohol and taken as such it will cause death. The Doctors who treated the victims and who conducted the autopsy over the dead bodies have given opinion that the deceased and the injured were victims only due to the consumption of illicit liquor mixed with methyl alcohol poison.

(3.) It is under these circumstances that the detaining authority came to the conclusion that all the above detenus were bootleggers and had actively assisted one another in procuring rectified spirit containing methyl alcohol, a poisonous substance as one of the ingredients from Karayamputhur in a clandestine manner, illegally transported the same to Panruti and kept the contraband in pits near the house of Mala. They are stated to have mixed rectified spirits and water in the ratio of 1 : 21/2 to make it fit for consumption. Their activities have caused the death of 36 persons and resulted in deformities to several others. In all the cases, the detaining authority says that the detenus are under remand and recourse to ordinary law will not have the desired effect of preventing them from indulging in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order. The detaining authority gives reasons as to how the detenus may come out on bail and indulge in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. We will deal with the case of each detenu on the basis of the arguments advanced before us.