FEVINAL Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This habeas corpus petition has been filed by the mother of the detenu, namely, Kavaskar, son of Francis, aged about 21 years, against the detention order passed by the second respondent, in P.D.No.17 of 2020, dated 02.07.2020, branding him as 'Goonda' as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act, 14 of 1982.

(2.) Though several grounds have been raised challenging the impugned detention order, Mr.N.Pragalathan, learned counsel for the petitioner, would mainly contend that the impugned order of detention is liable to be set aside on the grounds of failure of intimation of arrest of the detenu either to his family members or his relatives and delay in considering the petitioner's representation.

(3.) Per contra, Mr.K.Dinesh Babu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, while reiterating the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, submitted that the detention order has been rightly passed by the second respondent taking note of the activities of the detenu and it has been passed to prevent the detenu from indulging in similar activities in future. It is the further submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the arrest of the detenu has been properly intimated to his family members and the delay in disposal of the representation has not caused any prejudice to the detenu and hence, prayed for dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.